Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 22 - CESTAT NEW DELHICondonation of delay in filing appeal - delay in filing of an appeal before commissioner (appeal) - proof of deliver of an order in original - Held that:- Sub-clause (a) thereof makes it clear that the service of the order by the registered post with acknowledgement due to the person for whom it is intended or his authorised agent is the sufficient service. From the order under challenge, it is apparent that there is a document of dispatch of the order i.e. vide dispatch No.2200 dated 3rd March, 2010 - the compliance of Rule (a) Section 37 C of CEA stands fulfilled. There was no need to the Department to adopt any other mode as prescribed under various other Sections. Condonation of delay in filing appeal - Section 85 sub-clause (3) of the Finance Act - Held that:- As per Section 85 sub-clause (3) of the Finance Act, the appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) could have been filed within 60 days of such receipt of the order under challenge. The proviso to said Section empowers the Commissioner to condone the delay of subsequent 30 days. The Section makes it clear that the legislature has fixed a statutory limit for the purpose of any appeal to be filed before Commissioner (Appeals) - Commissioner (Appeals) has no discretion to condone the delay beyond 60 + 30 i.e. 90 days of the service of the order under challenge - delay cannot be condoned. There are no reasonable cause in the contention of the appellant - Moreover the Commissioner had no power to condone the delay of more than 3 years - appeal dismissed.
|