TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1477X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeal) to not condone the delay of even one day beyond the period of 60 days + 30 days. His discretion being available for the said 30 days only, as a result, there is no apparent infirmity in the Order. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Service Tax Appeal No. ST/52052/2015 [DB] - FINAL ORDER NO. 53135/2018 - Dated:- 4-10-2018 - MR. C.L. MAHAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) And MRS. RACHNA GUPTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Present for the Appellant: None Present for the Respondent: Mr. Sanjay Jain, DR ORDER PER: RACHNA GUPTA Present is an Appeal against the Order of Commissioner(Appeals) dated 06.02.2015 vide which the Commissioner(Appeals) has dismissed the Appeal in limini on the ground of limitation. Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant had denied the receipt thereof and has impressed upon that the Order came to their notice vide their letter dated 31.12.2012. But despite the opportunity of personal hearing was afforded by the Commissioner(Appeals) to the appellant, he could not have produced any evidence rebutting the dispatch of the Order by the Department. 5. The Appeal in hand was filed on 15.03.2013 which is apparently delayed by more than 2 years. Except their own letter of 2012 and a subsequent letter of 2013, there is nothing on part of the appellant as a reasonable justification for this delay. All those letters cannot be denied as an afterthought strategy to overcome the issue of limitation. Otherwise also, as per Section 37C, it being a statutory ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellate authority to entertain the appeal. The proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 35 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 delay only upto 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. As a result we find no merit in the Appeal. Appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
