https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263157 The Full Bench held that the appeal was barred by limitation as the period for filing under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, could not be extended beyond 30 days. A writ petition under Article 226 was deemed inappropriate to condone the delay. The Division Bench found the adjudicating authority acted within its jurisdiction in imposing penalties under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to the petitioners' failure to pay service tax and suppression of facts. The petitioners' challenge under Article 226 was dismissed as they failed to show the authority acted without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction. en-us Thu, 06 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 May 2016 11:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263157 The Full Bench held that the appeal was barred by limitation as the period for filing under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, could not be extended beyond 30 days. A writ petition under Article 226 was deemed inappropriate to condone the delay. The Division Bench found the adjudicating authority acted within its jurisdiction in imposing penalties under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to the petitioners' failure to pay service tax and suppression of facts. The petitioners' challenge under Article 226 was dismissed as they failed to show the authority acted without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 06 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263157