2014 (1) TMI 1667 - AT - Service Tax

Condonation of delay - Demand of interest u/s 75 - Business Auxiliary Service - Held that - adjudication order dated 27-9-2007 was challenged by the assessee by way of writ petition in 2012 after lapse of five years and withdrew the writ petition, obtaining liberty to pursue appropriate statutory remedies. Thereafter, the assessee filed an appropriate appeal against the order of demand and not the adjudication order. This appeal was dismissed as withdrawn on 19-3-2013. Thereafter is the present appeal filed on 3-4-2013 with a delay of nearly six years (1916 days). The adjudication order dated 27-9-2007 is to be nullity for patent lack of jurisdiction. It is a formal order passed by the authority exercising statutory powers authorizing assessment of Service Tax liability. Finance Act, 1994 clearly provides an appellate remedy to be pursued within three months from the date of order of which the assessee is aggrieved. - petitioner/assessee cannot gainfully contend that it had a reasonable or bona fide reason in not pursuing the appellate remedy, within limitation period of three months - Condonation denied.

Summary

Issues:
1. Service Tax levy on Business Auxiliary Service.
2. Delay in filing the appeal challenging the adjudication order.
3. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the Order-in-Original confirming Service Tax levy for providing Business Auxiliary Service. The appellant remitted a portion of the amount already. The High Court dismissed the writ petition and granted liberty to seek statutory remedies. The appellant filed a subsequent appeal challenging the adjudication order after a significant delay of 1916 days.

2. The appellant sought condonation of the delay, citing circumstances as justification. The appellant referred to legal precedents emphasizing a liberal construction of "sufficient cause" in the statute of limitation. However, the delay of nearly six years in filing the present appeal after withdrawing the writ petition and subsequent appeal raises questions regarding the diligence in pursuing the appellate remedy within the stipulated time frame.

3. The Tribunal observed that the adjudication order lacked jurisdiction due to the delay in challenging it. The Finance Act, 1994 provides a three-month period for filing an appeal against an order of assessment. The Tribunal noted that the appellant failed to provide a reasonable or bona fide reason for not pursuing the appellate remedy within the statutory limitation period. Consequently, the Tribunal found no satisfactory cause for condoning the delay of 1916 days and dismissed the application for condonation of delay, leading to the rejection of the appeal.