2008 (7) TMI 99 - AT - Service Tax

Delay of over 220 days in filing appeal - Where it is the case of the M.D that the accountant was in charge of legal matters including Central Excise, his own preoccupation with expansion of the company, is no valid plea in support of application for condonation of delay - delay of the appeal has not been satisfactorily explained and consequently this application gets dismissed - appeal also gets dismissed as time-barred

Summary

Issues: Delay in filing appeal, waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in service tax and penalty amounts.

In the judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai, the Member (J) presided over the case involving two applications by the appellant. The first application sought condonation of the delay in filing the appeal, while the second application requested waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery concerning service tax and penalty amounts. The impugned order from the Commissioner (Appeals) was received by the appellant on 5-5-07, and the appeal should have been filed before 5-8-07. However, the appeal was filed on 17-3-08, with a delay of over 220 days. The appellant's Managing Director explained the delay citing various reasons such as frequent travel for company expansion, accountant's resignation, and delay in noticing the unfavorable Order-in-Original. The Tribunal noted that the explanations provided were not satisfactory. Despite the Managing Director's claims regarding the accountant's responsibilities, the Tribunal found no valid justification for the delay in filing the appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application for condonation of delay, leading to the dismissal of the appeal as time-barred, along with the remaining application for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in service tax and penalty amounts. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court.