2015 (7) TMI 1146 - AT - Service Tax

Condonation of delay - delay caused due to Managing Director of the company was suffering from Hypertensive Heart Disease and was advised bed rest - whether delay in filing appeal due to ill health of Managing Director condonable, keeping in view of the fact that the cost accountant was authorized person to deal with the matter in question? - Held that - It is well settled that the delay cannot be condoned on flimsy grounds and there has to be a reasonable sufficient cause for such a huge delay of 218 days to be condoned. It is not the appellant s case that due to ill health of the Managing Director, their entire business came to a stand still. It is also not the M.D., who had to take the steps for prepare the appeal and filing the same in the Tribunal. The medical certificate placed on records shows that the appellant was suffering from Hypertension with effect from 1.7.2013 whereas the impugned order was received by the appellant on 20.4.2013 and there was sufficient time to file an appeal there against. Further, the other affairs of the company were being taken care of and as such, the ill health of the Managing Director is only an excuse. Further, learned advocate himself submitted that M.D. was not regularly visiting factory but was handling the day-to-day affairs of the company on irregular basis and Cost Accountant, Shri N.C. Sitaramacharyulu was authorized person to deal with the matter in question - Delay not to be condoned on such flimsy grounds - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues involved: Delay in filing appeal, condonation of delay application

Analysis:
1. Delay in filing appeal: The appellant sought to condone a delay of 218 days in filing the appeal. The impugned order was passed on 21.3.2013 and received by the appellant on 20.4.2013. The appeal was filed on 24.2.2014, exceeding the normal period of limitation.

2. Condonation of delay application: The reason for the delay was attributed to the Managing Director's health condition, specifically Hypertensive Heart Disease, leading to bed rest. The appellant argued that the Cost Accountant could have filed the appeal, as the Managing Director was not actively involved in daily affairs. However, the medical certificate indicated the onset of hypertension from 1.7.2013, while the impugned order was received earlier on 20.4.2013, allowing ample time for appeal preparation. The Tribunal noted that the company's operations were not entirely halted due to the Managing Director's health, and the delay was considered unjustifiable. The principle that delay cannot be excused on weak grounds was emphasized, requiring a valid and reasonable cause for such a significant delay.

3. Decision: The Tribunal rejected the condonation of delay application, leading to the dismissal of the stay petition and appeal as time-barred. The judgment highlighted the importance of substantial justifications for delay condonation and the need for a genuine and sufficient cause to warrant such leniency.