TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court allows appeal, sets aside Tribunal order, grants condonation with costs. Tribunal to hear parties, decide on merits.</h1> <h3>PRAKASH KOSHY BENJAMIN Versus THE COMMISSIONER FOR CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, KERALA</h3> PRAKASH KOSHY BENJAMIN Versus THE COMMISSIONER FOR CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX, ERNAKULAM, KERALA - 2019 (370) E.L.T. 174 (Ker.) Issues: Condonation of delay in filing an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore.Analysis:Issue 1: Condonation of Delay in Filing AppealThe appellant challenged an order fixing service tax liability and penalty under the Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs, and Service Tax (Appeals) limited the demand period and set aside the penalty. The appellant filed an appeal before the Tribunal with a delay of 214 days, attributing it to a communication gap with the consultant. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to unsatisfactory reasons for the delay. The appellant argued for a lenient view, emphasizing the larger interest and settled legal principles. The Tribunal's failure to consider condonation even with costs was contested by the appellant. The Court found that the Tribunal erred in not applying a liberal approach and settled legal principles. It held that the delay should have been condoned by compensating the respondent. Consequently, the question of law was decided in favor of the assessee against the revenue.Outcome:The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Tribunal's order. The appellant's application for condonation of delay was granted, subject to payment of Rs. 15,000 as costs to the respondent. The Tribunal was directed to restore the appeal, hear the parties, and dispose of the matter on merits. The judgment was clarified to apply only to the specific case and not as a precedent for others.This judgment highlights the importance of considering all circumstances in condoning delays, emphasizing a liberal approach and compensating the affected party.
TaxTMI 