Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2023 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 298 - CESTAT AHMEDABADRejection of appeal on the ground of time limitation - appellant had not filed condonation of delay application as required under Section 85 (3A) of the Finance Act, 1994 - HELD THAT:- The order-in-original against which the appeal was filed was passed on 19.05.2010. The appeal was filed on 17.04.2013. As regards the prescribed period of two months for filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and 30 days for condonable period, the said provision was brought into statute in the Finance Bill, 2012. From Sub Section (3) it is clear that in support of order passed by the learned Adjudicating Authority against which the appeal lies before the Commissioner (Appeals), the appeal shall be presented within three months from the date of receipt of the order. However, in the case of order passed after assent of Finance Bill 2012, the period is 60days plus 30 days as condonable period - In the present case the order-in-original was passed on 19.05.2010 i.e. much before the assent of Finance Bill, 2012 therefore, in spite of the fact that appeal was filed on 17.04.2013, three months normal period is available to the appellant to file appeal. The appellant in the present case has filed appeal within three months from the date of receipt of the order. Therefore, the appeal was filed very muchin the time limit - the impugned order is set-aside and the appeal is allowed by way of remand to the Commissioner (Appeals) for passing a fresh order on merit of the issue. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
|