2024 (2) TMI 140

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....umar , Advocates For the Respondent : Shri Shivam Syal , Authorized Representative ORDER PER S. S. GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 07.08.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant for not fulfilling the conditions of pre-deposit as per section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....otice dated 17.10.2017 for the period 01.10.2014 to 30.06.2017 proposing the demand of service tax amounting to Rs. 6,06,098/- along with interest and penalty. After following due process, the adjudicating authority vide its Order-in-Original dated 28.03.2018 confirmed the demand of Rs. 57064 and 6633/- of service tax along with interest and penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant file....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....emanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the issue on merits. 7. Ld. DR also agrees for the remand of the present case to the Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the matter on merits. 8. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the Ld. Commissioner has dismissed the appeal for non compliance of the mandatory pre-d....