2012 (11) TMI 330 - AT - Service Tax

Delay in filing appeal - Held that - The appellant has justified the delay which was unintentional and has occurred on account of circumstances beyond control of the applicant. Dismissal of appeal for non compliance of the stay order passed - Held that - As appellant has deposited an amount of Rs. 2,20,000/- towards the dues as has been confirmed by the adjudicating authority it is a fit case to set-aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the first appellate authority who has dismissed the appeal for non-compliance with the pre-deposit which has been paid - in favour of assessee by way or remand.

Summary

Issues:
Condonation of delay in filing appeal before Tribunal, non-compliance with stay order by first appellate authority.

Condonation of Delay:
The appellant filed for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, citing reasons such as the delay being unintentional, the order being misplaced by an ex-receptionist, and the Senior Accountant not receiving the order. The appellant highlighted the strong case in their favor and the significant implications of the matter. The affidavit of the Senior Accountant supported the grounds for delay. The Tribunal, after considering submissions, found the delay justified and allowed the application for condonation of delay, directing the registry to take the stay petition and appeal on record.

Non-Compliance with Stay Order:
The first appellate authority had dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance with the stay order, which required a deposit towards service tax and penalty. The appellant had deposited an amount exceeding the required sum, as evidenced by the taxpayer's counterfoil. The Tribunal noted that the first appellate authority had not passed an order on merits but dismissed the appeal solely for non-compliance with the pre-deposit order. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the first appellate authority. The appellant was directed to provide the counterfoil copies as evidence of compliance, and the first appellate authority was instructed to restore the appeal, follow principles of natural justice, and dispose of the matter.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding it to the first appellate authority for further proceedings, emphasizing the importance of compliance with procedural requirements and the need for natural justice in the adjudication process.