2014 (12) TMI 1142

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....E, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT MR YN RAVANI, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT JUDGEMENT Per: Vipul M Pancholi: 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties for final disposal of the petition. 2. The present petition is filed by the petitioners seeking prayer to quash and set aside an order dated 20.08.2014 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad and thereby direct the said Appel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t Service was dropped. However, the Joint Commissioner confirmed the service tax demand for amount of Rs. 7 ,64,538 /under Club or Association Service.     3.3) The petitioners therefore, challenged the said order before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal on merits by an order dated 30.7.2013.     3.4) The petitioners the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appellant which was not replied, nor did the appellant's representative participate in the adjudication proceedings. Thus, when the first appeal was preferred, there was a delay of 15 days and therefore, it was held by the Tribunal that the appellant had taken the issue very lightly. Secondly, that there is delay in filing the second appeal before the Tribunal and in the application for c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on for condonation of delay, the applicants have shown sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the limitation period. Thus we are of the considered opinion that sufficient cause is shown by the original appellants applicants in the application for condonation of delay. Even otherwise, opportunity is required to be given to the petitioners to submit their case on merits before the App....