2015 (5) TMI 455 - HC - Service Tax

High Court grants delay condonation, quashes Tribunal order, directs appeal, imposes cost.

GAYATRI LAND LOSSERS MAJOOR SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD & 1 Versus UNION OF INDIA & 3

The High Court allowed a delay condonation application for filing an appeal by a Cooperative Society of Land Loosers Farmers against a Tribunal's order. ... Condonation of delay - Held that:- Tribunal has rejected the delay condonation application by impugned order by observing that the petitioner - original appellant has not given any justifiable reason for filing the appeal belatedly. It is true that the petitioner - original appellant ought to have and/or could have submitted elaborate reasons to justify the reason for filing the appeal belatedly. However, considering the fact that the petitioner - original appellant is a Society of the Members - Land Loosers Farmers and as such, there do not appear to be any mala fide intention in not filing the appeal within the period of limitation and/or filing the appeal belatedly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, on imposing a reasonable cost, we are inclined to condone the delay and direct the learned Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with law. - Delay condoned. Issues:Delay condonation application for appeal filing.Analysis:The judgment involves a delay condonation application for filing an appeal by a Cooperative Society of Land Loosers Farmers challenging an order passed by the Custom Excise and Service Tax Tribunal. The Tribunal had rejected the application, citing lack of justifiable reasons for the delay. However, the High Court, considering the nature of the petitioner as a Society of Land Loosers Farmers and the absence of any mala fide intention, decided to condone the delay upon imposing a reasonable cost. The petitioner had already deposited the specified amount with the Court, which led to the High Court quashing the Tribunal's order and directing the Tribunal to proceed with the appeal.The High Court emphasized the societal status of the petitioners as Land Loosers Farmers, who had suffered land loss due to acquisition. The Court set aside the Tribunal's decision, imposed a cost that had already been deposited, and instructed the Tribunal to proceed with the appeal without raising the issue of limitation. The Registry was directed to return the deposited amount to the Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Vadodara II. Ultimately, the petition was allowed, and the rule was made absolute to the specified extent.