TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (9) TMI 587
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Singh Chauhan ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajesh Singh Chauhan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. This petition assails the validity of the order dated 03.11.2014, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Lucknow whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the demand of service tax made under Section 77 of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (Appeals) may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of two months, allow it to be presented within a further period of one month." Thus, the aforequoted provision prescribes the limitation of two months for filing of an appeal. However, the proviso appended to Section 85(3A) of the Act empowers the Commissi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nferred that the petitioner had fallen ill after 56 days from the receipt of the order which he intended to challenge by filing the appeal. Even if, the medical certificate submitted by the petitioner disclosed his ailment from 03.05.2013 to 02.06.2013, it cannot be said that on account of ailment during this period the petitioner could not inform or communicate the order to be appealed against a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal, which is a statutory right; rather than to shut it. For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned order dated 03.11.2014, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Lucknow, as is contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition, is hereby quashed. The Commissioner is directed to reconsider the application moved by the petitioner for condonation of delay in prefer....