2009 (11) TMI 454

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... out from original order. Copy of SCN also not available. Revenue not substantiated claim that order in original served to appellants in accordance with law. Held that – absence of evidence of affixing order in original on doors of assessee or notice board of authority concerned. Thus prima facie case made out for waiver of pre-deposit.
Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (T) REPRESENTED BY: Shri Aswat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... procedure for service of the order as per Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and therefore, the appellants could not have claimed that the order of the original authority had not been served on them. The appellants seek waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the demands of Service tax, interest and penalties adjudged in the impugned order. 3. Heard both sides. 4. The learned Char .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... accordance with law. The stay applications and the appeals filed deserved to be dismissed. 6. 1 have carefully considered the case records and the submissions made by both sides. From the orders of the original authority, it is not possible to make out the activity engaged in by the appellants during the material period, in respect of which demand of Service tax has been confirmed and penalties i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X