2016 (8) TMI 702 - HC - Central Excise

Condonation of delay - 190 days - Order in Original was received by Mr.P.Babu, who is an employee of M/s.Hometech Services P. Ltd and Mr.P.Babu misplaced the Order in December 2012. No one was in the company to guide the management to file an appeal - Held that - it is true that the appellant ought have been more vigilant. The fault of the employee cannot be a reason normally for the condonation of the delay. But, considering the fact, according to the appellant, that the business is already closed, we are of the view that the some leniency can be shown. - Appeal allowed

Summary

Issues:
Delay in filing appeal before Tribunal, Condonation of delay, Service tax penalty imposition, Closure of appellant company affecting appeal filing.

Analysis:
The judgment deals with an appeal filed by the assessee against an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, which refused to condone a delay of 190 days in filing the appeal. The appellant had been served with an Order imposing a penalty for short payment of service tax. The Tribunal dismissed the application for condonation of delay, leading to the further appeal. The Tribunal's reasoning was that the delay was not properly explained, as the order copy had been served on the appellant. However, the Court noted that the mere service of the order copy does not automatically imply that the delay was not properly explained.

The application for condonation of delay highlighted that the appellant company had been closed for four years, incurring losses with no employees receiving remuneration. An employee misplaced the order copy, leading to the delay in filing the appeal. The Court acknowledged that the appellant should have been more vigilant, and an employee's fault typically does not justify condonation of delay. Nevertheless, considering the circumstances, including the closure of the business, the Court decided to show leniency in this case.

As a result, the civil miscellaneous appeal was allowed, the Tribunal's order was set aside, and the application for condonation of delay was granted. The matter was remitted back to the Tribunal for further proceedings in accordance with the law. The judgment concluded by closing the case without any costs imposed on either party.