2017 (7) TMI 1301 - AT - Service Tax

Condonation of delay in filing appeal - delay of 23 days beyond the period of two months prescribed in section 85 of Finance Act, 1994 - Time Limitation under section 85 of Finance Act, 1994 - HELD THAT - On a perusal of the order-in-original it is seen that the second paragraph in the pre-amble to the order has intimated a time-limit of three months for filing appeal before the first appellate authority. It was pleaded before the first appellate authority that the appeal was filed beyond the period of two months on the presumption that this instruction in the pre-amble reflected the statute. In view of the obvious mis-information which led to the consequences narrated above, the denial of a decision on merit on the part of the first appellate authority, who should have condoned the delay on the circumstances alone, is not in accordance with law. Matter remanded back for the decision on merits.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Denial of refund of &8377; 25,16,924 due to delay in filing appeal under section 85 of Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis:
1. The dispute in this case revolves around the denial of a refund amounting to &8377; 25,16,924 by M/s Instrumentation Limited, who contested the decision of the Commissioner of Service Tax-II (Appeals) in order-in-appeal no. MUM-SVTAX-002-APP-405-16-17 dated 12th September 2016. The first appellate authority based their decision on the ground of limitation under section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994, citing a delay of 23 days beyond the prescribed two-month period.

2. During the proceedings, the appellant did not appear, and the case was heard by the Learned Authorised Representative. It was noted that the order-in-original had mentioned a time-limit of three months for filing an appeal before the first appellate authority, leading to confusion regarding the correct statutory provision. The appellant argued that the appeal was filed beyond two months based on the information in the order-in-original.

3. The Tribunal observed that the mis-information provided in the order-in-original regarding the time limit for filing an appeal had caused confusion and ultimately led to the delay in filing. The Tribunal held that the first appellate authority should have condoned the delay considering the circumstances and proceeded to decide on the merit of the case. Therefore, the impugned order denying the refund was set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the first appellate authority for a decision on merit.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues surrounding the denial of refund due to a delay in filing the appeal under the relevant provisions of the Finance Act, 1994, and the subsequent decision of the Tribunal to remand the case for a fresh consideration on merit.