2018 (2) TMI 649 - AT - Service Tax

Appeal dismissed due to time-bar & incorrect application of timeline provisions. Commissioner's decision beyond jurisdiction.

M/s. Deep Overseas Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & ST, Ludhiana

The appeal was dismissed as time-barred and on merits due to incorrect application of appeal timeline provisions. The Commissioner's decision on merits ... Condonation of delay of 10 days in filing appeal - Maintainability of appeal - Held that: - Section 85 (3A) of Finance Act, 1994 says that the appeal is to be filed before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) within 60 days of communication of the adjudication order and the said period can be further extended by another 30 days if the reasons for causing delay is explained satisfactorily. The reasons for causing delay have been explained by the appellant that the Consultant dealing the case, was in difficulty as his mother was in hospital and he was looking after her. In that circumstances, the appellant has explained the reasons for causing the delay of 10 days satisfactorily - the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is condoned. The matter is consigned to the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the issue on merits - appeal allowed by way of remand. Issues:Appeal dismissed as time-barred and on merits - Correct application of provisions of law for appeal timeline - Whether delay in filing appeal can be condoned.Analysis:The appellants filed appeals against orders dismissed as time-barred and on merits. The orders dated 04.06.2015 were received on 06.06.2015, and appeals were filed on 18.08.2015, 10 days late. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeals as time-barred for not being filed within the statutory 60-day limit. The Commissioner also dismissed the appeal on merits. The main issue was whether the appeal was maintainable in law. The Commissioner's decision on merits was beyond jurisdiction due to the time-barred status. The Commissioner had not correctly applied the law, as there is no Section 35 of the Finance Act, 1944 for service tax matters. Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994 allows for a 60-day appeal period, extendable by 30 days with satisfactory reasons for delay. The appellant's reasons for the 10-day delay were accepted due to the consultant's personal difficulties. Thus, the delay was condoned.The judgment found no merit in the impugned orders and set them aside. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide on merits, providing a detailed speaking order after hearing the appellant. The appeals were disposed of by way of remand, ensuring a fair opportunity for the appellant to present their case.