2019 (11) TMI 1072

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../ COD / 50663 /2018 in ST/50787/2014 and Cross Objection Application No. ST/Cross/50662/2018 in ST/50787/2014 order of CESTAT dated 23rd July, 2019 which is at Annexure A-1 to the memo of this appeal, whereby delay of 468 days in preferring cross objections under Section 86(4) of the Finance Act, 1994 of this appellant was not condoned. Thus, there was a delay on the part of this appellant in filing cross objections. Before the CESTAT, the said delay was not condoned and hence the present appeal has been preferred. 2. It appears that revenue had filed an appeal challenging order in original passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax. The appeal of the revenue is bearing no. 50787/2014 filed before CESTAT, New Delhi. 3. It further appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d by counsel for the respondents that looking at the condonation application preferred by this appellant before CESTAT, New Delhi, the reasons given were not sufficient at all for condonation of delay of 468 days in filing of the cross objection. Moreover, on various dates, the matter was adjourned at request of counsel for the appellant before CESTAT, New Delhi. This time could have been utilised for filing of the cross objection. Several lawyers have appeared before CESTAT, New Delhi on behalf of this appellant and despite that, cross objections have not been filed. Hence, it is submitted by counsel for the respondents that looking to the reasons given by CESTAT, New Delhi in the impugned order, this appeal may not be entertained because ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellant company received notice of this Hon'ble Court issued in ST Appeal No. 50787 of 20l4 on 14.02.2017, and approached his counsel for filing of response thereof. However, due to financial crunch, the Applicant was not able to pursue the matter effectively. 5. During March 2017, since the matter could not be pursued effectively, the Applicant Company engaged another Lawyer for contesting the case-. 6. That owing to financial crunch resulting mainly from the fund illegally stuck by virtue of the impugned order, Applicant Company could not service its credit facility obtained from the HDFC and as a consequence, its account was declared NPA on 01.05.2017. On 22.02.2018, the credit facility stood withdrawn by the Bank.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8 days. Moreover several dates were given by the CESTAT, New Delhi, as many as eight adjournments which were sought by this appellant. Moreover counsels were also appearing on behalf of the appellant before CESTAT, New Delhi. The appeal of the revenue was filed much earlier in point of time and looking to paragraph 5 of the delay condonation application as stated hereinabove, during March, 2017 since the matter could not be pursued effectively, this appellant engaged another lawyer for contesting the case. Thus, it appears that when this appellant was engaging lawyers who have appeared for as many as 9 dates before CESTAT, New Delhi, they could have filed cross objections within period of limitation. 12. Looking to the order of CESTAT, N....