2025 (4) TMI 961

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. Brief fact of the case is that the appellant is the owner of the bus. Andhra Pradesh Stated Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) is an organisation owned by the Government of Andhra Pradesh providing road transport service for travelling of public of Andhra Pradesh (AP), through the fleet of Buses owned by them. Since the number of buses owned by APSRTC is not sufficient to cope with the ever increasing travelling needs of bus passengers in AP, it has turned to private bus owners to reduce the shortage in their fleet to certain extent and improve the services provided by them. APSRTC, entered into an agreement with the appellant for giving the bus to the Corporation, for their use only for the purpose....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....failed to comply as directed by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order in his Stay Petition No. 132/2012-(H-III)ST dated 13.08.2012 to deposit 10% of the total liability. It was mandatory for appellant to pre-deposit the amount as directed by Learned Commissioner (Appeals). It was mandatory before deciding the appeal on merit. Hence, appeal was dismissed on this ground itself. Therefore, Tribunal cannot take up the case for decision on merit. 6. None is responding from several hearings in spite of notice. No one present to argue for the appellant. Heard argument of Learned AR for the Department to decide on merit of the case on the basis of materials in record as provided under Rules 20 of Customs Excise and CESTAT procedural Rules, 1982.....