9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 543X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were fixed on 07.12.2011, 27.12.2011 and 18.01.2012. Since the appellant did not appear for the personal hearings, the Commissioner, with no other option, had passed the final order confirming the demand. In any case, no specific provision of law is alleged to have been violated by the Department, on the contrary, we find that a show cause notice has been issued and received by the appellant, for which no reply has been filed by the appellant. Thereafter, notices sent for personal hearing have been returned unserved as the door was locked. - Decided against assessee. - Civil Miscellaneous Appeal Nos.395 and 2136 of 2014 MP No.1 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 7-8-2014 - R. Sudhakar And G. M. Akbar Ali,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Anand Sashi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de payment of appropriate service tax. As the appellant failed to appear for all the three hearings to submit their defence, with no other option except to decide the case on merits, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has passed the following order: i) I confirm the demand of ₹ 4,36,60,430/- (Rupees Four Crores Thirty-six Lakhs Sixty Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty only) against M/s.ILS Logistics Pvt. Ltd., being the Service tax payable for the period from 2004-05 to December 2008 under Section 73(2) read with proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994; ii) I appropriate an amount of ₹ 3,21,659/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Twenty-one Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty-nine only) paid by them towards the service tax d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s are at liberty to mention at the time of compliance for disposal of appeal. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the pre-deposit by the Tribunal, the appellant preferred an appeal before this Court in C.M.A.No.395 of 2014. Thereafter, since the appellant did not comply with the order dated 27.11.2013, directing pre-deposit, the Tribunal, by order dated 04.02.2014, dismissed the appeal for non-compliance of the order directing pre-deposit. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant preferred an appeal before this Court in C.M.A.No.2136 of 2014. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the personal hearing notices have not been served on the appellant and hence the principles of natural justice have been violated. In support of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant are not applicable to the facts of the present case as they relate to the proceedings before the Appellate Authority or the Appellate Tribunal. In any case, no specific provision of law is alleged to have been violated by the Department, on the contrary, we find that a show cause notice has been issued and received by the appellant, for which no reply has been filed by the appellant. Thereafter, notices sent for personal hearing have been returned unserved as the door was locked. The Commissioner of Central Excise in his order held as follows: Personal hearing fixed for 15.11.2011 was sought for adjudication by the notice vide their letter dt.14.11.2011. The noticee failed to appear for further hearings fixed on 07.12.2011, 27.12.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
