2013 (6) TMI 514 - AT - Service Tax

Non compliance of stay order - Held that - the time granted by the Hon ble High Court has already expired. No stay order from the apex court against the High Court s judgment has been produced by any of the appellants. - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Non-compliance with pre-deposit orders, dismissal of appeals for non-compliance with Section 35F of the Central Excise Act.

Non-compliance with pre-deposit orders:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore pertains to the non-compliance with pre-deposit orders issued to the appellants. The Tribunal had directed the appellants to pre-deposit Rs.60 lakhs each within a specified period and report compliance, as stated in the stay order. The appellants had filed writ petitions against the stay order, which were dismissed by the High Court. Although the High Court granted additional time for pre-depositing the amounts, the appellants failed to comply within the extended period. The Superintendent (AR) contested the submission made by the counsel for the appellants regarding the expiry of the granted time. The Tribunal noted the absence of compliance with the stay order within the extended time granted by the High Court and the lack of any stay order from the apex court against the High Court's judgment.

Dismissal of appeals for non-compliance with Section 35F:
The judgment further highlighted that as of the date of the Tribunal's assessment, there was no compliance with the stay order within the time frame granted by the High Court. Upon reviewing the records, it was confirmed that the time extension provided by the High Court had lapsed. Additionally, none of the appellants had produced a stay order from the apex court in opposition to the High Court's decision. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed both appeals due to the appellants' failure to adhere to the requirements of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, which is applicable to service tax appeals. The decision to dismiss the appeals was made based on the non-compliance with the statutory provisions, leading to the unfavorable outcome for the appellants.

This judgment underscores the significance of complying with pre-deposit orders and statutory provisions, emphasizing the legal obligations imposed on appellants in matters related to Central Excise Act and service tax appeals. The dismissal of the appeals due to non-compliance serves as a cautionary tale for parties involved in similar legal proceedings, highlighting the repercussions of failing to meet the specified requirements set forth by the competent authorities.