2008 (9) TMI 97 - AT - Service Tax

Appeal was filed against order of adjudication with the Commissioner (Appeals) with a delay of 607 days, which was beyond the period condonable by the appellate authority - held that a Commissioner (Appeals) had no power to condone any delay of appeal beyond the condonable period of delay under Section 35 - appeal of the assessee was rightly dismissed by Commissioner, as time-barred - order of Commissioner does not call for interference

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in filing appeal against order confirming demand of service tax and imposing penalties.
2. Condonation of delay in filing appeal under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act.
3. Applicability of case laws cited by the appellants in the present case.
4. Authority of Tribunal to condone delay in filing appeals beyond the prescribed period.

Analysis:
1. The case involved an appeal against an order confirming demand of service tax and penalties, with a significant delay in filing the appeal beyond the condonable period. The original authority had passed the order in 2005, and the appeal was filed in 2007, 607 days late. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal as time-barred, citing judgments of the Delhi High Court in similar cases.

2. The appellants relied on various decisions to support their case, including ITC Ltd. case where the Supreme Court allowed a belated appeal under specific circumstances. However, the Tribunal found that the cited case laws did not alter the legal position in the present scenario. The Tribunal emphasized that the case was squarely covered by the Delhi High Court's judgment in Delta Impex, which restricted the condonation of appeal delays beyond the prescribed period.

3. The Tribunal noted that while the High Court had condoned delays in certain cases based on specific circumstances and reasons provided by the appellants, those instances were distinguishable from the current appeal. The Tribunal highlighted that the lower appellate authority rightly followed the precedent set by the High Court, emphasizing that the equitable relief granted in other cases did not apply to the present situation.

4. Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the lower appellate authority's decision to dismiss the appeal as time-barred, in line with the Delhi High Court's ruling in Delta Impex. The Tribunal concluded that the case did not warrant interference, and therefore, the appeal was dismissed along with the stay application. The judgment was pronounced in open court, affirming the decision to not condone the delay in filing the appeal beyond the condonable period under Section 35 of the Act.