2013 (1) TMI 631 - AT - Service Tax

Revenue's Appeal Dismissed for Late Filing Beyond Time Limit

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai dismissed the Revenue's appeal due to the failure to condone the delay in filing the appeal beyond the three-month ... Condonation of delay - limitation for filing appeal under Section 35B(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - internal review delay by Committee of Commissioners not a ground for condonation - appeal dismissed for non-condonation of delayCondonation of delay - limitation for filing appeal under Section 35B(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - internal review delay by Committee of Commissioners not a ground for condonation - Application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal was rejected and the appeal dismissed for being time-barred. - HELD THAT: - The impugned order was received on 21/05/2012 and the statutory period for filing the appeal expired on 21/08/2012. The appeal was filed on 21/10/2012. The Revenue's explanation was that a Committee of Commissioners took time to review the order and there was a divergence of opinion which resulted in the matter going to the jurisdictional Chief Commissioner who directed filing of the appeal only on 14/09/2012. Section 35B(3) mandates that every appeal must be filed within three months; the Committee's internal review that extended beyond the three-month limitation did not furnish a sufficient legal basis for condoning the delay. Having found no adequate justification to extend time, the application for condonation of delay was dismissed and, consequently, the appeal was dismissed. [Paras 2, 3]Application for condonation of delay dismissed; appeal dismissed as time-barred.Final Conclusion: Delay in filing the appeal beyond the three-month period prescribed by Section 35B(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was not condoned where the internal review by the Committee of Commissioners exceeded the statutory period; the application for condonation was dismissed and the appeal was dismissed as time-barred. The Revenue filed an appeal with the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai, seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The appeal was filed late due to a difference of opinion among Commissioners, resulting in a delay beyond the three-month limit specified by the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal dismissed the application for condonation of delay and consequently dismissed the appeal.