Q. Who were the advocates involved in the case M/s. Ushus Systems vs CC, Chennai?

For the Appellants None. For the Respondents Parmod Kumar, SDR.

Q. What are the equivalent citations for M/s. Ushus Systems vs CC, Chennai ?

The equivalence citation are LQ/CESTAT/2011/1231 ;

Q. What was the bench assigned for the case M/s. Ushus Systems vs CC, Chennai?

MS. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM , DR. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY

M/s. Ushus Systems Vs. CC, Chennai On 27 June, 2011

Are you looking for a legal research tool ?

Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

M/s. Ushus Systems v. Cc, Chennai

(Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench At Chennai)

DM 92/10, C/S/183/10 & C/265/2010 (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal C.Cus. No. 89/2010 dated 19.01.2010, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai) | 27-06-2011

Per: Jyoti Balasundaram,

We note that in spite of the Registry pointing out defects in the form of non-production of proof of date of receipt of the impugned order in original, such defects have not been rectified. We also note that the case has been listed for hearing from 21.09.2010 and till date such defects have not been corrected by the assessees. Hence, we decline to grant the adjournment sought by the appellants and dismiss the appeal in terms of Rule 11 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, along with stay application.

Advocate List

For the Appellants None. For the Respondents Parmod Kumar, SDR.

Bench

MS. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM
DR. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY

Eq Citations

LQ/CESTAT/2011/1231

Head Note

CESTAT — CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, R. 11 — Non-production of proof of date of receipt of impugned order in original — Dismissal of appeal on ground of, in terms of R. 11 (Para 1)