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

2015 (11) TMI 1485 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2015 (11) TMI 1485 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Condonation of delay - Delay of 124 days - Held that:- The order-in-original is dated 26.2.2014 and had it been received in time, it is possible that appellant would have filed appeal prior to 6.8.2014 in which case no mandatory pre-deposit would have been required to be made. Be that as it may, as the Order-in-Original was received almost five months after its date the appeal was filed after 6.8.2014 and as has been held by Allahabad High Court in 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

ffairs" (though unaudited) and bank statement and in view of the Supreme Court observations - Delay condoned. - Condonation Application No. 50881 of 2015 in Service Tax Appeal No. 51284 of 2015 - Misc. Order No. 52855/2015 - Dated:- 10-8-2015 - R K Singh, Member (T) And Sulekha Beevi CS, Member (J) For the Appellant : Shri A K Batra, CA For the Respondent : Shri Govind Dixit, AR ORDER Per R K Singh COD application has been filed seeking condonation of the delay of 124 days in filing of the appea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ST, Katiji and Others 2002 -TIOL- 444 -SC -LMT to press the point that sufficient cause is sufficiently elastic to allow courts to apply law meaningfully so that it subserves the ends of justice. 2. Ld. A.R. for Revenue on the other hand straneously argues that there is no time chart given for the delay and in any case, the appellant ought to have been prepared for filing of the appeal within time along with mandatory pre-deposit as required. He cites judgment Allahabad High Court in the case 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

oth sides. The order-in-original is dated 26.2.2014 and had it been received in time, it is possible that appellant would have filed appeal prior to 6.8.2014 in which case no mandatory pre-deposit would have been required to be made. Be that as it may, as the Order-in-Original was received almost five months after its date the appeal was filed after 6.8.2014 and as has been held by Allahabad High Court in the case of Ganesh Yadav (supra), the mandatory pre-deposit of 7 1/2 % in such a case is no .....

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