9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 612X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed themselves for service tax in the Financial Year 2009-2010 under the category of Cosmetic and Plastic Surgery. The service of health check-up and treatment services was brought under the purview of service tax w.e.f. 1.7.2010. The appellant was under exemption limit till 15th July 2010 and started paying service tax from 16.7.2010 onwards. 2.1 The preventive staff of the service tax visited the appellant s premises on 15.9.2010 and found that appellant had not collected service tax from 16.7.2010 to 31.8.2010. After the completion of verification process, a show-cause notice was issued demanding penalty to the extent of Rs. 90,000/- under Rule 15(1) of CENVAT Credit Rules (CCR), 2004 and Rs. 9,09,520/- under Rule 15(3) of the CCR, 2004. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inordinate delay and the delay was only 17 days in filing the appeal. He further submitted that in the preamble to the adjudication order passed by the Additional Commissioner, it was mentioned that appeal could be filed within three months from the date of communication of the order and if he takes the time of three months then there was only a delay of 17 days in filing the appeal and condonation was sought by giving reasons for the delay which was not considered by the Commissioner (A). 5. On the other hand, the learned AR submitted that as per statutory provisions, 60 days period is prescribed in filing the appeal and the Commissioner (A) has got the power to condone the delay up to 30 days and after 30 days he does not have the power ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises vs. CCE, Jamshedpur reported in 2008 (221) ELT 163 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that, the proviso to sub-section(1) of Section 35 ibid makes the position crystal clear that the appellate authority has no power to allow the appeal to be presented beyond the period of 30 days. The language used makes the position clear that the legislature intended the appellate authority to entertain the appeal by condoning the delay only upto 30 days after the expiry of 60 days which is the normal period of preferring appeal . 7. Therefore, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited supra, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order and I uphold the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
