TMI Blog2010 (11) TMI 588X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of delay seems to be justifiable aptly supported by an affidavit by a senior functionary - Decided in favor of the assessee - ST/1443/2010 - 528/2010 - Dated:- 10-11-2010 - S/Shri M.V. Ravindran, P. Karthikeyan, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri Jai Sing, Chartered Accountant, for the Appellant. Ms. Sudha Koka, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : M.V. Ravindran, Member (J)]. This application is filed by the applicant for condoning a delay of 53 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 2.1 Ld. Chartered Accountant appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that there is a delay of 53 days in filing the appeal and submits that the reason for delay is (i) Employee handling the service tax matters including the su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cided on 3-9-1998 - 2008 (228) E.L.T. 162 (S.C.)] (d) Prestige Estates Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. CST, Bangalore [2009-TIOL-1617-CESTAT-BANG = 2010 (17) S.T.R. 553 (Tri-Bang.)] (e) Adecco Flexione Workforce Solutions Ltd. v. CCE, Bangalore [2009-TIOL-1144-CESTAT-BANG = 2009 (16) S.T.R. 24 (Tribunal) = 2009 (242) E.L.T. 465 (Tri-Bang.)] (f) Hans Colour Lab Studio v. CCE, Jaipur-I [2009-TIOL-1003-CESTAT-DEL] (g) Meera Impex, Delhi + 2 Others v. CESTAT, Chennai + 2 Others [2010-TIOL-138-HC-MAD-CX = 2010 (254) E.L.T. 256 (Mad.)] (h) Birdy Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. CST, Bangalore [2009 (240) E.L.T. 532 (Tri. Bang.)] (i) Balaji Bio-Tech Ltd. v. CC CE, Guntur [2010 (251) E.L.T. 17 (Kar.)] 3. Ld. SDR on the other hand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... timated to the Tax Controller of the applicant company who resigned from the company on 29-1-2010 and the letter addressed by the Counsel was in his name which was left unattended to. We find that the Chief Controller Finance of the applicant-company has filed an affidavit in support of the application for condonation of delay of 53 days which is in substance the entire submissions made by the ld. Chartered Accountant. We find that in this case, the delay is 53 days and the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Improvement Trust (supra) and other judgments of the apex court has settled that the appellant would not have gained in any manner whatsoever, by not filing the appeal within the period of limitation and generally as a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
