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>CESTAT dismisses appeal filed beyond statutory period under section 35 citing Singh Enterprises precedent on limitation</h1> <h3>Base Corporation Ltd Versus Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax Pune – III</h3> CESTAT Mumbai dismissed an appeal filed beyond the statutory period under section 35 of Central Excise Act, 1944. Following precedent from SC in Singh ... Condonation of delay in filing appeal - time limitation - appeal filed beyond the period permitted in section 35 of Central Excise Act, 1944 - HELD THAT:- Taking note of the decision in SINGH ENTERPRISES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAMSHEDPUR [2007 (12) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT], it was held in M/S TNET MESSAGING SERVICES P LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CGST& CX, MUMBAI EAST [2023 (3) TMI 891 - CESTAT MUMBAI] that 'it is well settled that once the period of limitation expired as prescribed u/s. 85(3) ibid neither the Tribunal nor the first appellate authority has power to condone the delay in filing the appeal beyond the statutory period.' Thus, it is not open to the Tribunal to condone such delay as could not be condoned by the first appellate authority. There is no merit in the appeal which is dismissed. Issues:- Challenge to order of Commissioner of Service Tax- Duty liability under Central Excise Act- Confiscation and penalties under Central Excise Rules- Appeal filed beyond permitted period- Applicability of Limitation ActAnalysis:The judgment involves a challenge by M/s Base Corporation Ltd against an order of the Commissioner of Service Tax dismissing their appeal regarding duty liability under the Central Excise Act, confiscation, and penalties under Central Excise Rules. The appellant's appeal was dismissed due to being filed beyond the period permitted by law. The impugned order relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Singh Enterprises v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur. The appellant was not represented during the proceedings, and it was revealed that the appellant had not been operational at their registered place of business. The Tribunal took up the appeal for disposal with the assistance of the Learned Authorised Representative.Additionally, the Tribunal referenced a similar case, Tnet Messaging Services P Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs, CGST & Central Excise, Mumbai East, where the issue of delay in filing an appeal was addressed. The Tribunal highlighted the legal position established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding the limitation period for filing appeals under the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellate authority, including the Tribunal, does not have the power to condone delays beyond the statutory period specified by law. The judgment cited various legal precedents and decisions to support this position, including rulings from the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Courts.Furthermore, the Tribunal discussed the inapplicability of the Limitation Act in cases where the legislature has prescribed specific time limits for filing appeals. The judgment emphasized that the Tribunal cannot extend the limitation period beyond what is provided by the statute. The Tribunal also referenced decisions from other High Courts that supported the position that statutory time limits for filing appeals must be strictly adhered to. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that since the appeal was filed beyond the statutory period specified under the Central Excise Act, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) rejecting the appeal was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed. The Tribunal pronounced its order in open court on a specified date.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
