TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 72X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 86 of the Finance Act 1944. The address of the Tribunal was also mentioned - when the letter accompanying the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) clearly mentions that an Appeal could be filed before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal at West Block- II, R.K.Puram, New Delhi, the Consultant was not justified in sending the Appeal by speed post to an Assistant Commissioner and that too at an incorrect address. The Consultant cannot be said to be unaware of the procedure. It is also clear that neither the Consultant nor the Appellant made any effort to enquire from the Tribunal whether the appeal that is alleged to have been sent by speed post had actually been receiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent by speed post and was received in the Tribunal on 12 February, 2019. It was accompanied by an application for condoning the delay. Various defects were pointed out by the Registry of the Tribunal. A fresh appeal was then sent by the Appellant by speed post which was received in the Registry on 16 April, 2019. 3. It has been submitted by learned Counsel on the basis of the facts stated in the application filed for condoning the delay of 1146 days (i.e. three years and two months) that the Consultant of the Appellant had sent the Appeal by speed post to the Tribunal on 16 April, 2015 and so, the Appellant was under a bonafide belief that the same had been received by the Tribunal. However, the Appellant received a recovery ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the Appeal was sent to the Tribunal. Learned Authorised Representative also submitted that if the appeal had been sent by the speed post, than too it was the duty of the Appellant to have enquired about the receipt of the Appeal but no such effort was made nor it has been stated in the Application that the envelope did not return back. He, therefore, submits that no good cause has been shown by the Appellant for condoning the delay in filing the Appeal and the delay condonation application should be rejected. 6. We have considered the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel of the Appellant as also the learned Authorised Representative of the Department. 7. The Appeal has been filed to assail the order d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the amount because what has been stated in the delay condonation application, is that the appeal said to have been filed before the Tribunal was was not available on CESTAT website . This clearly implies that the Department had earlier informed the Appellant about the recovery proceedings and it is only when the Appellant informed the Department that it had filed an appeal before the Tribunal that efforts were made by Department to find out the status of the appeal. It is, thereafter, that the Department informed the Appellant that the website of the Tribunal did not indicate that the appeal had been filed. What is also important to notice is that the Appellant has not even disclosed as to on what date the letter sent by the Department ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
