TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (10) TMI 1420
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to the Tribunal by an assessee is three months from the date of the receipt of the order, sub-section (2) provides that the Committee of Chief Commissioner may direct the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to appeal to the Tribunal if it objects to any order passed by the Commissioner and sub-section (3) of Section 86 provides that every appeal shall be filed within the four months from the date on which the order sought to be appealed against is received by the Committee of Chief Commissioners. 3. Since the appeal was filed after the expiry of four months from the date of receipt of the order by the Committee of Chief Commissioners, the appeal was accompanied by an application for condoning the delay. The averments that have been made in the said application are reproduced below: "1. It is humbly submitted that this condonation for delay application is before this Hon'ble Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi against the impugned order-in-original No. 12-13/PK/GST/DE/2017-18 dated 13.02.2018 passed by the Commissioner, Central Tax, Delhi East Commissionerate, New Delhi communication received on 13.02.2018. 2. It is humbly sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iled within five days on 18 September 2019. It is, therefore, his submission that the delay should be condoned and the appeal should be heard on merits, more particularly when the assessee has also filed an appeal to assail the impugned order. 5. Shri Varun Gaba learned Counsel appearing for the respondent has, however, submitted that there is an enormous delay of 463 days in filing the appeal, which delay has not been satisfactorily explained. Learned Counsel pointed out that the Committee of Chief Commissioners had received the order on 13 February 2018 and when the period prescribed for filing the appeal by the Department is four months from the date of receipt of the order by the Committee of Chief Commissioners, a decision should have been taken by the Committee of Chief Commissioners within four months so as to have enabled the Department to file the appeal within the period stipulated in Section 86 (3) of the Act, but the Committee of Chief Commissioners took a decision after a period of one year and seven months on 13 September 2019 and even the order passed by the Committee of Chief Commissioners does not give any reason as to why it took so much time to take a decision....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The file was, therefore, available on 31 January 2018 when the order was passed by the Commissioner and it cannot be said that the file was 'mixed up'. The file was also available before the Committee of Chief Commissioners on 13 February 2018. The period prescribed for filing the appeal by the Department is four months from the date of receipt of the order by the Committee of Chief Commissioners. Thus, even though no time may be prescribed for the Committee of Chief Commissioners to take a decision, yet since the period for filing the appeal by the Department is four months, it can safely be said that a decision has to be taken by the Committee of Chief Commissioners before four months so as to enable the Department to file an appeal before the Tribunal within four months. 13. A perusal of the decision taken by the Committee of Chief Commissioners on 13 September 2019 for filing the appeal does not give any reason why it took them one year and seven months to take a decision, when in fact the period prescribed for filing the appeal before the Tribunal is four months from the date they receive the order. The application also does not give any specific reason as to why so much ti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... end of June 2017, and GST was introduced from 1 July 2017. After introduction of GST and on account of restructuring certain files were in relation to the appeal to be filed before the High Court were transferred from one jurisdiction to another jurisdiction. It was as result of such shifting of files from one jurisdiction to another on account of re-structuring and reorganization as sequel to implementation of GST, there was delay in filing the appeal. In that case the delay in filing the appeal was adequately explained. However in the present case even the adjudication order is passed after implementation of GST and there is no turmoil in handling the files on account they being shifted from one jurisdiction to another. In the present case jurisdiction of the Commissioner and Committee of Chief Commissioner during the period of delay has not under gone any change or re-structuring. Hence this decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court cannot be made applicable in the present case." [emphasis supplied] 15. It is true that sub-section (5) of Section 86 does provide that the Appellate Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit the filing of the appeal of memorandum of cross-object....