2016 (1) TMI 926

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng or recovering any amount, as service tax, in so far as it relates to the period from October, 2007 to March, 2010, pursuant to the order passed by the respondents, in order-in-Original Nos.5 to 7 of 2011, dated 27.1.2011, passed by the third respondent, for the period from September 2007 to 2010. 2. The Writ Appeal, in W.A.No.744 of 2015, had been filed against the order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court, dated 18.3.2015, made in W.P.No.6608 of 2015. 3. As certain common issues have arisen in the Writ Petition and in the Writ Appeal they are taken up together and a common order is being passed. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee had raised various grounds stating that the impugned order in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e months. Such extended period had also expired on 10.8.2011. As the assessee had filed the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), on 17.1.2014, it was beyond the condonable period. In such a case, the Commissioner of Appeal has no power to condone the delay, as held by the Supreme Court, in Singh Enterprises vs. CCE, Jamshedpur [2008 (221) ELT 163]. The proviso to Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994, and Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which was the subject matter of the said case are pari materia. Hence, the Commissioner (Appeals) was right in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee, the petitioner in the Writ Petition, in W.P.No.13262 of 2015 and the appellant in the Writ Appeal, in W.A.No.744 of 2015. 8. At this st....