9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 364X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant : Mr. Joseph Prabakar For the Respondents : Mr. V. Sundareswaran JUDGMENT (The Judgment of the Court was made by V. Ramasubramanian,J.) While one appeal arises out of an order directing the appellant to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 40,00,000/- for entertaining the appeal, before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal [CESTAT], the second appeal arises out of the consequential ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant filed an application for recalling the said order on the ground that the said order was passed in his absence. Accepting the plea of the appellant, the first order dated 23.07.2014 was recalled on 27.08.2014 and the pre-deposit condition was modified to one of a direction to pay Rs. 40,00,000/-. The appellant was directed to make this deposit within a period of eight weeks. 5. Since t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mstances, we do not find anything wrong with the direction issued by the Tribunal to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 40,00,000/-. 7. It is true that the said finding is only prima facie and it is always open to the appellant to convince the Tribunal at the time of final hearing about the nature of the services rendered. 8. Once it is found that the parameters for deciding the application for a pre-dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore 31.10.2015, the Tribunal shall take up the main appeal for disposal and dispose of it on or before 31.12.2015. If the appellant makes the deposit as aforesaid, the consequential order will automatically gets set aside as otherwise, it will stand revived. 10. With the above direction, both the Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
