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. Ramchandra Singh Versus The Union of India Through Central Excise And Service Tax Department And Others

Condonation of Delay - Delay in filing of appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) - petitioners claiming benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act of 1963, to exclude the time consumed in disposal of the writ petition before this Court in computation of the delay - Held that:- 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 furnished for delay cause .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he writ and on another hand the period of limitation has already been started. It ought to be kept in mind by this type of "chance taking petitioner" that they should simultaneously prefer statutory appeals also so that whenever there are such type of clauses that limitation cannot be condoned beyond the period of thirty days the appeal may not be dismissed for want of condonation of delay. The petitioner is lethargic, but, certainly not an ignorant person and is knowing all fine niceties of law .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l, J. 1. Instant writ petition has been preferred against the order dated 17th October, 2014 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in Appeal Nos. 107 to 114/RAN/2014 whereby, the appeals preferred by the appellants, including this petitioner, have been dismissed mainly on the ground that these appeals have been preferred beyond the period of condonable delay. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has filed a writ petition (T) No. 7713 of 2013 on 17th December, 2013 before this C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t the order in original passed by Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Ranchi by the petitioners claiming benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act of 1963, to exclude the time consumed in disposal of the writ petition before this Court in computation of the delay. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2011)15 SCC Page no. 30 Ketan V. Parekh Vs. Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement and another as also relied u .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as not been properly appreciated by the Commissioner (Appeals) and, therefore, this petition has been preferred. It has been submitted that delay may be condoned which is approximately of 15 months and the matter may be remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for its decision on merits. 3. Counsel for the respondents has submitted that no error has been committed by Commissioner(Appeals) while dismissing the appeals preferred by the petitioners of Appeal Nos. 107 to 114/RAN/2014 as delay was not .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ance Act, 1994. Penalty was also affirmed under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. Thus, there was no ambiguity at all. So far as liability of this petitioner is concerned in the order in original passed by Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Ranchi this petitioner could have prefer appeal within 60 days+30 days maximum otherwise, if the appeal is preferred beyond ninety days the delay is not condonable in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in [2008] 3 SCC .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r including interest and penalty, this petitioner preferred a writ petition before this Court being W.P.(T) No. 7713 of 2013 on 17th December, 2013 which was dismissed vide order dated 25th March, 2014. Thus, no benefit of Section 14(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963 can be given to this petitioner. As such, no error has been committed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in not condoning the delay. Even otherwise also, as submitted by the counsel for the respondentUnion of India that prima-facie Section .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ated hereinabove. Hence, this writ petition may not be entertained by this Court. 4. Having heard counsel for both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we see no reason to entertain this writ petition mainly on the following facts and reasons: (i) Order in original was passed by Additional Commissioner Central Excise on 31st January, 2013 which is appellable under section 85 (3A) of the Finance Act, 1994. The period of limitation is sixty days. Delay can be condoned by C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r] of Central Excise (Appeals)- [(1) Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed by an adjudicating authority subordinate to the [Principal Commissioner of Central Excise or Commissioner of Central Excise], may appeal to the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals)] (2) Every appeal shall be in the prescribed form and shall be verified in the prescribed manner. (3) An appeal shall be presented within three months from the date of receipt of the decision or order of [such adjudicating au .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the date of receipt of the decision or order of such adjudicating authority, made on and after the Finance Bill, 2012 receives the assent of the President, relating to service tax, interest or penalty under this Chapter: Provided that the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of two months, allow it to be presented within a further period of one month]. (4) 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

n hearing the appeals and making orders under this section, the [Commissioner] of Central Excise (appeals) shall exercise the same powers and follow the same procedure as he exercises and follows in hearing the appeals and making orders under the [Central Excises Act,1944] (1 of 1944)." (Emphasis supplied) In view of the aforesaid decision and Section 85 (3A) of the Finance Act, 1994 no error has been committed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in not condoning the delay because it was beyond 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

n ITC Ltd. V. Union of India to contend that the high Court had the power to condone the delay. This stand was not accepted by the High Court. 4. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that even if it is conceded for the sake of argument that the Commissioner had no power to condone the delay, yet the High Court in exercise of power conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can condone the delay. It is stated that the power in this regard is untramme .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eals) [hereinafter in this Chapter referred to as the Commissioner (Appeals) within sixty days from the date of the communication to him of such decision or order: Provided that the Commissioner (Appeals) may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of sixty days, allow it to be presented within a further period of thirty days. (2) Every appeal under this section shall be in the prescribed form and shall be ve .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

for condonation can be accepted is statutorily provided. It was submitted that the logic of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (in short "the Limitation Act") can be availed for condonation of delay. The first proviso to Section 35 makes the position clear that the appeal has to be preferred within three months from the date of communication to him of the decision or order. However, if the Commissioner is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

30 days. The language used makes the position clear that the legislature intended the appellate authority to entertain the appeal by condoning delay only up to 30 days after the expiry of 60 days which is the normal period for preferring appeal. Therefore, there is complete exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The Commissioner and the High Court were therefore justified in holding that there was no power to condone the delay after the expiry of 30 days' period. 9. Learned counsel fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bnormal delay of nearly 20 months is that the appellant concern was practically closed after 1998 and it was only opened for some short period. From the application for condonation of delay, it appears that the appellant has categorically accepted that on receipt of order the same was immediately handed over to the consultant for filing an appeal. If that is so, the plea that because of lack of experience in business there was delay does not stand to reason. ITC case was rendered taking note of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

14 of the Limitation Act 1963 the said Section is also not applicable in the facts of the present case because the writ petition (Tax) No. 7713 of 2013 was preferred by this petitioner before this Court on 17th December, 2013 which was dismissed vide order dated 25th March, 2014. Thus, writ petition which was also preferred after the limitation period was over for preferring appeal U/s 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994. (iv) Looking to the order in original dated 31st December, December, 2012 pass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

petitioner" has filed a writ petition before this Court at his own peril and risk because some times it takes time for final adjudication of the writ and on another hand the period of limitation has already been started. It ought to be kept in mind by this type of "chance taking petitioner" that they should simultaneously prefer statutory appeals also so that whenever there are such type of clauses that limitation cannot be condoned beyond the period of thirty days the appeal may .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ch the plaintiff has been prosecuting with due diligence another civil proceeding, whether in a court of first instance or of appeal or revision, against the defendant shall be excluded, where the proceeding relates to the same matter in issue and is prosecuted in good faith in a court which, from defect of jurisdiction or other cause of a like nature, is unable to entertain it. (2) In computing the period of limitation for any application, the time during which the applicant has been prosecutin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o a fresh suit instituted on permission granted by the court under rule 1 of that Order, where such permission is granted on the ground that the first suit must fail by reason of a defect in the jurisdiction of the court or other cause of a like nature." As stated herein above, writ petition was preferred on 17th December, 2013 whereas order in original is dated 31st January, 2013. Therefore, the benefit of section 14 of the Limitation Act cannot be extended to this petitioner. (vii) There .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gh Court in the writ petition no. 1830 of 2013 with Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3419 of 2014 the judgment and order dated 24th December, 2014, Para 30, 33 and 44 reads as under: "30) We have already held that by subsection (2) of section 29 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and applying it to the facts of the present case, sections 4 to 24 (inclusive) of the Limitation Act, 1963 have limited application to the proceedings and particularly Appeals under section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. The thir .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 can be invoked by the Petitioner to get over the outer limit or restriction in sub section (1) of section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. In fact, all the judgments that have been referred by the Hon'ble Supreme Court take the view that there was no power to condone the delay after expiry of the prescribed period. In that regard, the Hon'ble Supreme Court jhas, in para 21, referred to a judgment delivered by it in the case of Singh Enterprises vs. Co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n Company reported in (2001) 8 SCC 470. None of these decisions have been held to be laying down any proposition or principle of law, which has been pressed into service by Mr. Dhond before us. In fact, there is nothing in these Judgments which would enable us to hold that the Petitioner can invoke section 14(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963, to extend the period stipulated in subsection (1) of section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. Therefore, the observations in para 30 of the Judgment in the case .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

use no argument was advanced as regards the applicability of doctrine of merger. The Hon'ble Supreme Court entertained the SLP and granted leave to Appeal as also stay. The time spent in prosecuting the proceedings before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and which is bonafide was permitted to be excluded. Pertinently, the test laid down is applicable in a case where a Appeal is filed that being a continuation of the lis, its pendency can be relied upon the claim the benefit. A Writ Petition' .....

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
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

Forum: Excise duty credit on finished stock at additional place of business.

Forum: Manpower Service provider

News: Jaitley asks biz not to wait till last day to file GST returns

Circular: Implementing Electronic Sealing for containers by exporters under self-sealing procedure prescribed by Circular 26/2017-Cus dated 1st July, 2017 and Circular 36/2017 dated 28 th August, 2017. — reg.

Forum: Construction of single unit bungalow

Forum: Input credit of gst paid on urd

Article: 20 Things You must know about E Way Bills in GST Law

Article: ‘DUTY DRAWBACK’ CANNOT BE EQUATED WITH ‘REBATE OF DUTY’

Highlight: Notification regarding GST rate for branded cereal, pulses and flour

News: Notification regarding GST rate for branded cereal, pulses and flour

Highlight: Anti-dumping duty on import of bus/truck tyres from China

Highlight: Cabinet approves Extension of time period of the Scheme "Special Industry Initiative for J&K" (Sll J&K) - Udaan

Highlight: Non-payment of service tax - maintenance and repair charges - appellants had knowingly and deliberately shown the repair charges as job work charges to mislead about their taxability - demand confirmed.

Highlight: BAS - execution of the project of smart card for vehicle registration – implementing the SOC-VRC project - The fact that the Government has outsourced some part of the work and paid certain consideration for such outsourced work, does not make the activity subject to service tax.

Circular: Amendments in Hand Book of Procedures 2015-20 –reg.

News: Cabinet approves Extension of time period of the Scheme "Special Industry Initiative for J&K" (Sll J&K) - Udaan

Highlight: Constitution of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) under GST-reg. - Trade Notice

Highlight: Amendments in Hand Book of Procedures 2015-20 –reg. - Various amendments are made in Chapter-4 of Hand Book of Procedures 2015-2020.

Circular: Constitution of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) under GST-reg.

Highlight: Sharing of expenses - BAS - promotion of business of group companies - sharing of expenditure for common facilities cannot be treated as service by one to another in such arrangement.

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Article: Credit of unsold stock [Section 140(3)] - Actual Credit as well as Notional Credit - Part-I - GST Transitional provisions

Circular: Certain Clarifications sought on Construction Services provided in the Real Estate Sector – reg.

News: Anti-dumping duty on import of bus/truck tyres from China

News: Fast-track GST refund, else ₹ 65K cr may be stuck: Exporters

Highlight: It is open to the Settlement Commission to use best judgment in arrival of the figure. Nonetheless it has to explain the manner in which the best judgment figure has been arrived at by the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - advances given to societies - in the absence of legal right of the assessee in the said society the amount advanced cannot be treated as deemed income.

Highlight: When electrical installations are treated as plant and machinery the depreciation has to be allowed @ 25% as per provisions contained u/s 32

TMI Note: Capital Gain - transfer of right in the land or transfer of land itself - addition u/s 50C - Harassment to the honest tax payers

Highlight: Option to avail composition scheme under GST by electronically filing an intimation in FORM GST CMP-02 and FORM GST ITC-03 upto 30-9-2017 - See Rule 3(3A)

TMI Note: Does ICDS apply for the purposes of computing exemption u/s 11 to 13.

Highlight: Voluntary Reporting of Estimated Current Income and Advance Tax Liability - CBDT issues draft notification

TMI Note: Certain ICDS provisions are inconsistent with judicial precedents. Whether these judicial precedents would prevail over ICDS.

Highlight: Provisions of ICDS shall prevail w.e.f. AY 2017-18 to the transactional issues dealt therein over earlier judicial pronouncements.

Notification: Levy of anti dumping duty on New/unused pneumatic radial tyres with or without tubes and/or flap of rubber (including tubeless tyres) having normal rim dia code above 16 originating in, or exported from China PR

News: Voluntary Reporting of Estimated Current Income and Advance Tax Liability

TMI Note: In case of conflict between ICDS and other specific provisions of the Income-tax rules, 1962 governing taxation of income like rules 9A, 9B etc. of the Rules, which provisions shall prevail.

TMI Note: Does ICDS apply to computation of Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) u/s 115JB of the Act or Alternate Minimum Tax (AMT) u/s 115JC of the Act.

TMI Note: Where a term has not been defined under ICDS, nor under the Act, but has different interpretations given to it by the courts in tax cases, and in ICAI Accounting Standards, which interpretation would prevail while interpreting ICDS.

TMI Note: Whether the provisions of ICDS apply to a non-resident who claims the benefit of a double taxation avoidance agreement (DTAA).

TMI Note: In case any of the ICDS provisions is contrary to a circular or press release issued by the CBDT, which would prevail over the other.

TMI Note: ICDS-I requires disclosure of significant accounting policies and other ICDS requires specific disclosures. Where is the taxpayer required to make such disclosures specified in ICDS.

Notification: Income Computation and Disclosure Standards (ICDS) - New ICDS to be effective from AY 2017-18

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Highlight: GST - Detention of goods under transport - discrepancy in documents - the statutory provisions provide a mechanism for adjudication following detention of goods including for the provisional release thereof pending adjudication - HC

Highlight: Reassessment - first few paragraphs of the assessment order dealt with objections and disposed of accordingly - Unfortunately, the manner in which the AO has decided the issue is wholly unsustainable in law - HC

Highlight: Business expenditure u/s 37 - liquidated damage - breach of contract terms - Expenditure was not incurred for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law - cannot be disallowed - HC

Highlight: Valuation - inclusion of reimbursement of expenses - managing participation of clients in certain mela, fairs, promotional activities etc. - They are liable to service tax on the gross amount received - They cannot restrict their tax liability to only agency commission

Highlight: TDS liability - ITAT confirmed the liability - We do not see how it is possible for us to uphold the order of the Tribunal and when it purports to decide two Appeals of the Revenue by single paragraph conclusion - HC

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - sufficiency of material available with the AO to form a belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment - bogus purchases - seller refused to respond - notice would not be interfered with - HC



|| 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