2007 (7) TMI 91 - AT - Service Tax

Appeal before Commissioner (A) Appellant contended that delay caused in preparation of appeal due to non-receipt of copies of SCN but Commissioner (A) has rejected the condonation of delay and confirm the demand Matter remanded to adjudicating authority for reconsideration and decided afresh

Summary

Issues:
1. Application for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax
2. Ex-parte order by Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise
3. Dismissal of appeal by Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground of limitation

Analysis:
1. The judgment pertains to an application for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax along with interest and penalty imposed under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal decided to proceed with the appeal itself after granting the prayer for stay. The appellants sought condonation of delay in preferring the appeal before the lower appellate authority, explaining that they did not receive copies of the show cause notice and relied upon documents necessary for preparing the appeal. The Tribunal found that the delay was satisfactorily explained, and the lower appellate authority should have condoned the delay and heard the assessee on merits instead of dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of being time-barred.

2. The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise passed an ex-parte order confirming the demand and imposing a penalty without providing any reasons for such confirmation. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal on the basis of being time-barred due to a delay of 48 days in filing the appeal. However, the Tribunal noted that there was no record to rebut the appellants' claim of non-receipt of the show cause notice and relied upon documents. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, remanding the case for a fresh decision on merits to the adjudicating authority, emphasizing the need for proper reasoning for the confirmation of demand and imposition of penalty.

3. The Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, highlighting the importance of providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and considering their reply to the notice before passing fresh orders. The judgment underscores the significance of due process and the necessity for authorities to provide adequate reasoning and opportunities for parties to present their case effectively. The decision serves as a reminder of the procedural requirements and the obligation to ensure fairness and justice in tax-related matters.