Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 1538 - AT - Service TaxCondonation of delay in filing appeal - Section 86(4) of the Finance Act, 1994 - admissibility of an appeal or permit the filing of a memorandum of cross-objection after the expiry of the period referred to in sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) - sufficient cause for delay or not - HELD THAT:- The delay condonation application mentions that the Counsel engaged by the Applicant in 2017 did not pursue the matter effectively. The Applicant had obtained service tax registration under “construction service” and had undertaken many construction activity. It was also represented by many Counsel. It is, therefore, not possible to accept the contention of the learned Counsel for the applicant that as the Counsel did not pursue the matter effectively, cross-objection were not filed and it was only when a new Counsel was engaged in 2018, and advice was given to file cross-objections, that cross-objections were filed on 20 July, 2018 with a delay of 468 days. This inordinate delay of 468 days has not been explained to the satisfaction of the Tribunal. It is no doubt true that each day’s delay has not to be explained, but at the same time an Applicant is required to satisfy the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for not presenting the cross-objection within the stipulated period of 45 days. In the present case, we are more than satisfied that the Applicant has miserably failed to satisfy that there was sufficient cause in not filing the cross-objections within the stipulated period. Even otherwise, the delay in filing the cross-objection is inordinate and under Section 86(5) of the Act, the Appellate Tribunal can permit the filing of the cross-objection even after the expiry of 45 days, if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting them within that period. It has been found as a fact that the Applicant has been unable to satisfy the Tribunal that it was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the Appeal within the stipulated period - There is no explanation for the delay from April, 2014 and the delay from 27 February, 2017 has also not been satisfactorily explained. The delay condonation Application is, accordingly, rejected. The Appeal may be listed for final hearing on 12 September, 2019.
|