2009 (6) TMI 734 - AT - Central Excise

CESTAT Ahmedabad 2009 case: Appeals allowed after time limit issue; Commissioner (Appeals) order set aside

In the CESTAT, Ahmedabad case of 2009 (6) TMI 734, the tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the appellants after rejecting them previously due to ... Appeal to Commissioner (Appeals) - Limitation - Delay in filing appeal - Held that: - In view of the fact that the Service Tax Commissionerate and the Commissioner (Appeals) are located in the same building, it is possible that by mistake, the appeals have been delivered at wrong office. It is surprising that the department officials took such a long time to return the papers. On the other hand, we find that the decisions cited by the learned SDR are not exactly on similar facts and therefore are not relevant. We find that appellant had filed appeal in time but in the wrong office. Therefore, we find that it cannot be said that there was a delay in filing the appeal - the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) rejecting the appeal on the ground of delay is set aside and the matter remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals), who shall proceed to consider the appeal filed by the appellant - appeal allowed by way of remand. In the appellate tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad case of 2009 (6) TMI 734, the appeals filed by the appellants were rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to exceeding the time limit. The appellant's advocate argued that the appeal was filed on time but delivered to the wrong office, and upon resubmission, there was no delay. The advocate cited a relevant tribunal decision, while the SDR argued lack of care in filing the appeal. The tribunal found the appellant filed on time, but in the wrong office due to proximity, thus no delay occurred. The Commissioner (Appeals) order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for further consideration. The decision was pronounced in court by B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T).