2015 (9) TMI 625

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... harma, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER We have heard learned Counsel for the Appellant and the Respondent. 2. The present appeal has been preferred against the order dated 15-9-2014 of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 58697 of 2013 dismissing the Appeal upon failure to make pre-deposit and report compliance pursuant to order dated 11-7-2014 passed un .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t date for deposit, in all fairness, the application was required to be decided one way or the other and the Appeal could not have been dismissed in the manner done without disposing the aforesaid application. 4. Learned Counsel for the Respondent has opposed the Appeal. It is submitted that it is not the case of the Appellant that the order for pre-deposit was passed behind its back and wit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... was required to be considered and disposed in accordance with law. The order states that the application was not on record. If the Office of the Tribunal did not place it on record, the Appellant cannot be faulted with. 8. We therefore of the considered opinion that the order in its present form with regard to the present Appellant is not sustainable. The order dated 15-9-2014 is set aside .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X