TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (2) TMI 305
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ervices but were found to have not discharged their liability. Resultantly, vide show cause notice dated 14.06.2012 a demand of service tax of Rs. 5,15,072/- was proposed (for the period 01.06.2007 to 31.08.2011) on taxable income of Rs. 49,02,586/-. Another show cause notice dated 26 July 2012 for the period 1.09.2011 to 31.03.2012 proposing demand of service tax of Rs. 52,465/- on taxable income of Rs. 5,09,369/-. Appropriate interest and the proportionate penalties were also proposed to be recovered/imposed. Both the show cause notices were adjudicated by order in original No. 37-38/2013-14 dated 14.02.2014. The demand of show cause notice dated 14.06.2012 was dropped on the ground of demand being barred by limit. However, the demand for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yed to be allowed. 5. While rebutting the submission, learned Departmental Representative has mentioned that though the present appellant had raised the objection about competence of Commissioner (Appeals) for entertaining the impugned appeal, in their cross-objections filed before Commissioner (Appeals), but Commissioner (Appeals) has still proceeded to adjudicate which is sufficient to reveal that the delay that occurred in filing the appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) was being duly condoned by him. Hence the same cannot be a ground for setting aside the order under challenge. While submitting on merit, it is mentioned that there is no dispute about the impugned activity of the appellant to be a taxable service hence the demand for th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ommissioner of Central Excise or Commissioner of Central Excise may, of his own motion, call for and examine the record of any proceedings in which an adjudicating authority subordinate to him has passed any decision or order under this Chapter for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the legality or propriety of any such decision or order and may, by order, direct such authority or any Central Excise Officer subordinate to him to apply to the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) for the determination of such points arising out of the decision or order as may be specified by the Principal Commissioner of Central Excise or Commissioner of Central Excise in his order. (2) Every order under sub-section (1) shall be made within a perio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l shall be in the prescribed form and shall be verified in the prescribed manner. (3) An appeal shall be presented within three months from the date of receipt of the decision or order of such adjudicating authority, relating to service tax, interest or penalty under this Chapter, made before the date on which the Finance Bill, 2012, receives the assent of the President: Provided that the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of three months, allow it to be presented within a further period of three months. (3A) An appeal shall be presented within two months from the date of receipt of the decision or ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... adjudicating authority which is prayed to be set aside and appeal, if directed under said order has to be filed within one month of the communication of the said order. There is nothing mentioned is Section 84 about power of condonations with Commissioner (Appeals). It is proviso to Section 85 which empowers the Commissioner (Appeals) to condone a period of 30 days (one month) after the expiry of 90 days (3 months). The proviso makes it clear that the Commissioner has no competence to condone the delay beyond 30 days over 90 days. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises Vs. CCE - 2008 (221) ELT 163 (SC) held as under: "3. The Division Bench noted that since the Commissioner had no power of condonation beyond the statut....