2010 (12) TMI 113 - AT - Service Tax

Condonation of delay - Appeal - Delay is due to the confusion in the date of receipt of the order, which was caused due to non-communication of the order to the concerned department and is not without any negligence and in terms of principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner, Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji as reported on (1987 - TMI - 40082 - SUPREME Court) will cover the issue and hence, prays for condonation of delay - It seems the appellant had not put in place any system that would have enabled him to exercise his legal right appeal under the law - The application for condonation of delay as without merits

Summary

Issues: Delay in filing appeal before the Tribunal.

The judgment pertains to an application filed for the condonation of a 42-day delay in filing an appeal before the Tribunal. The applicant, represented by a Chartered Accountant, argued that the delay was due to confusion in the date of receipt of the impugned order, which was not communicated promptly to the legal department for appeal preparation. The Chartered Accountant cited the case of Commissioner, Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji to support the request for condonation based on the principle of no negligence. An affidavit from the Assistant Finance Controller of the applicant was also submitted to support the claim. On the other hand, the departmental representative contended that the delay was not satisfactorily explained and opposed condonation. The Tribunal considered both arguments and examined the records. It was noted that the impugned order was indeed received by the appellant's company, and the argument about different divisions in the same building causing communication issues was deemed without merit. The Tribunal emphasized that it is the responsibility of the appellant to organize their business operations efficiently to exercise their legal rights diligently. As no proper justification was provided for the delay, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not establish grounds for condonation and dismissed the application, consequently dismissing the appeal as well.

---