2015 (10) TMI 631

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....x<br>MR. V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND MR. T.MATHIVANAN, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr.B.Satish Sundar For The Respondent : Mr.V.Sundareswaran, Senior Panel Counsel JUDGMENT (Judgment was delivered by V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN,J) These appeals are filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 challenging a common order passed by the second respondent refusing to condone the delay of 12 days ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rescribed time and did not register with the Service Tax Department during the relevant point of time and also did not file S.T.3 returns during the relevant time. 4. The appellant submitted replies to the show cause notices. However, the Adjudicating Authority passed Orders in Original bearing Nos. 32/2010 dated 15.3.2010, 81/2010 dated 26.10.2010 and 48/2011 dated 18.7.2011. The three show ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d. Hence these appeals. 6. In the applications for condonation of delay, the appellant has indicated that the marriage of the son of the Chief Executive Officer of the appellant was scheduled to be held during October 2013 .The wedding was to be held at Vijayawada in Andhra Pradesh and the reception was scheduled to be held at Chennai. Therefore, a delay of 12 days had occasioned. But, the Trib....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he applications for condonation of delay are not disputed as false or frivolous. The appellant does not appear to be a limited company for the Tribunal to draw an inference that there are other officers to take care of the affairs. When a proprietary concern or a partnership firm is the appellant, it is but natural for such concerns or firms to rely upon individual leadership to take any major dec....