2015 (4) TMI 40

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....levying Service Tax on the works undertaken by the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, amounts to double taxation and consequently set aside the Original Order dated 31.8.2012 passed by the 1st respondent for the period 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. Going by the petitioner's own case, the order aforesaid challenged before us was unsuccessfully taken to the appellate authorities under statute successively and both these authorities refused to entertain the same as they were presented not only beyond the period of limitation prescribed therefor , but also beyond the condonable period. On identical fact and issue, we have delivered a judgment on 29.1.2015 in Writ Petition No. 1409 of 2015 between M/s. Resolute Electronics Private Limited and U....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tentionally, then remedy is absolutely barred and no Court of law can entertain the matter. However, the petitioner availed alternative remedy unsuccessfully, so we are not considering this aspect in great detail. The aforesaid conclusion of ours is in consonance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Singh Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur 2008(221) ELT 163 (S.C.), though we did not have the occasion to see the same. Para-8 of the said judgment is relevant for our purpose, which reads as follows: "The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) as also the Tribunal being creatures of Statute are vested with jurisdiction to condone the delay beyond the permissible period provided under the statute.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d." Now, a copy of our judgment was supplied to the learned counsel for the appellant, who after considering the same submits citing a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Consolidated Engineering Enterprises vs. Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department and Others (2008) 7 SCC 169, that attempt to prefer appeal unsuccessfully before the appellate authority, does not preclude the petitioner from maintaining the writ as at present his client is remediless. We are of the view that the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court cited by the learned counsel is miles away from the point involved herein. In the case reported before the Supreme Court, the question was whether time taken for prosecuting the proceedings bona fide under S....