9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent. ORDER The proceeding was initiated against the petitioner for evasion of service tax and non-payment of service tax amounting to rupees 63 lacs and odds. 2. According to the petitioner, the substantial amount had already been deposited and contest is made over the further liability of the payment of Service Tax. 3. By an order dated 8th September, 2010 the authority dete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scellaneous application filed before the Tribunal, the petitioner seeks for restoration of the appeal as well as the application for condonation of delay which is again dismissed and the said order is challenged in this writ petition. 5. It is not in dispute that the Court or the Tribunal should adopt a lenient approach in dealing with an application for condonation of delay. Length of delay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dure) Rules, 1982 provides for setting aside ex parte order of dismissal provided a sufficient cause is made out. There lies distinction between review and the application setting aside the ex parte order. The review is to be decided within the settle legal parameter as laid down in the rules applicable. Review is a creature of a statute and cannot be usurped by a statutory authority or the Tribun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner has made out a case, which constitutes the sufficient cause. This Court finds that the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause in not appearing on the day when his application for condonation of delay was decided ex parte. 8. Accordingly, this Court sets aside the impugned order as a consequence whereof the Miscellaneous Application No. 83359 of 2013 stands allowed. 9. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
