Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Industrias Del Recambio India (Pvt.) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai

2015 (8) TMI 451 - CESTAT CHENNAI

Demand of service tax - Reverse charge mechanism - Bar of limitation - Held that:- appellant filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) beyond 90 days and the period of delay is 172 days. Whereas, as per the proviso to sub-section (3A) of Section 85 of Finance Act, the Commissioner (Appeals) may allow further period of 30 days if the appeal is not filed within two months from the date of receipt of Order-in-Original. In this regard, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises Vs. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dispensing with the stay application the appeal itself is taken up for disposal. 2. The issue relates to demand of service tax under reverse charge mechanism. Against the Order-in-Original dated 22.1.2013, the appellant preferred appeal on 25.9.2013 before the Commissioner (Appeals) along with application for condoning the delay of 172 days. The lower appellate authority dismissed their appeal on limitation of time as there is no power to condone the delay beyond the period of 90 days stipulated .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rom the date of receipt of Order-in-Original. In this regard, the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises Vs. CCE, Jamshedpur - 2008 (221) ELT 163 (SC) has categorically held that Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal has no power to condone the delay beyond the stipulated period. Paragraphs 8 to 10 of Apex Court order is reproduced as under:- 8. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) as also the Tribunal being creatures of Statute are vested with jurisdiction to condone t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e Commissioner is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of 60 days, he can allow it to be presented within a further period of 30 days. In other words, this clearly shows that the appeal has to be filed within 60 days but in terms of the proviso further 30 days time can be granted by the appellate authority to entertain the appeal. The proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 35 makes the position crystal clear that the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

power to condone the delay after the expiry of 30 days period. 9. Learned counsel for the appellant has emphasized on certain decisions, more particularly, I.T.C. s case (supra) to contend that the High Court and this Court in appropriate cases condoned the delay on sufficient cause being shown. 10. Sufficient cause is an expression which is found in various statutes. It essentially means as adequate or enough. There cannot be any straitjacket formula for accepting or rejecting the explanation .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version