2018 (5) TMI 885 - AT - Service Tax

Tribunal Upholds Timely Appeals: Cost Imposed for Delay

The Tribunal found the appellant's reasons for a delay of approximately 35 days in filing an appeal unconvincing. Despite citing business closure and lack ... Condonation of delay of 35 days in filing appeal - case of appellant is that the company being closed, application for condonation of delay be allowed - Held that: - It is seen from the records and as correctly pointed out by both sides, out of turn hearing of Early Hearing application was made by the Revenue and allowed. Be that as it may, the delay of 35 days in filing the appeal, though explained, reasons given for delay in filling the appeal seems to be unconvincing. Identical issue decided in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Versus Mst. Katiji And Others [1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME Court], where it was held that no pedantic approach should be made directing the parties to explain every day delay and that the doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner. Delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal is more than 30 days and explanation being sketchy, appellant needs to be put to condition of imposing cost for hearing of appeal on merits. Issues: Condonation of delay in filing an appeal before the Tribunal.In this case, the primary issue was the condonation of a delay of approximately 35 days in filing an appeal before the Tribunal. The appellant cited closure of business operations and lack of manpower as reasons for the delay. The appellant's counsel argued that due to the company being referred to NCLT and the appointment of an interim resolution professional, there were difficulties in paying the required pre-deposit. The Tribunal considered the submissions from both sides and noted that a similar issue involving the same appellant was already before the Tribunal in another appeal. Despite the explanation provided for the delay, the Tribunal found the reasons unconvincing. The Tribunal referred to a judgment by the Apex Court emphasizing that a non-deliberate delay should not result in a meritorious matter being dismissed.The Tribunal decided that the delay in filing the appeal was more than 30 days and the explanation provided was deemed sketchy. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the appellant to pay a cost of Rs. 5,000 to the Commissioner of Central Tax, Secunderabad-commissionerate within two weeks. The appellant was required to report compliance by a specified date. Upon compliance with this condition, the Tribunal allowed the application for condonation of delay and directed the registry to take the appeal on record for disposal. The decision highlighted the importance of balancing substantial justice against technical considerations and emphasized the need to avoid a pedantic approach in such matters.