New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (11) TMI 1418 - CESTAT CHENNAI

2015 (11) TMI 1418 - CESTAT CHENNAI - TMI - Condonation of delay - delay of 291 days - Held that:- The medical certificate when discloses that the appellant was under treatment from 1.2.2013 that does not reveal after 23.11.2012 whether the appellant had any knowledge before his treatment started. It is also curious to notice that 21 days before expiry of the period of filing of the appeal the appellant was under treatment. Added to this, it is further noticeable that when the appellant was disc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d discovery thereof after a span of time is untenable. Tribunal has experienced frequently the plea of leaving of an employee soon after an impugned order is received by a litigant and sudden discovery thereof after some time to seek delay condonation. - Condonation denied. - ST/COD/42448 & 42450/2013 & ST/S/42449 & 42451/2013 and ST/42482 & 42483/2013 - Final Order Nos. 41421 and 41422 of 2015 - Dated:- 15-10-2015 - D. N. Panda, Member (J) And R. K. Singh, Member (T) For the Appellant : Mr Ms S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hakaran (copy of which is available at page 59 of the appeal folder). Page 58 of the appeal folder shows that he was discharged on 15.8.2013. Only after that appeal was filed on 11.12.2013. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant was not able to state who was the employee and whether that employee is continuing in service with the appellant and what steps the appellant has taken when it has faced a service tax demand of nearly ₹ 6 crores. Learned counsel was also not able 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

before his treatment started. It is also curious to notice that 21 days before expiry of the period of filing of the appeal the appellant was under treatment. Added to this, it is further noticeable that when the appellant was discharged from the hospital on 15.8.2013, there were no steps taken by him till 11.12.2013 which was the date of filing of appeal. 5. We are not concerned with the length of delay. But we are concerned with the cause of delay. The cause stated in the application does 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

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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