2008 (11) TMI 221 - HC - Service Tax

Appeal to high court - Whether in view of the habitual conduct of the respondent in deliberately not appearing before the statutory authorities on the dates of hearing the learned Tribunal is justified in remanding the matter - Whether the Tribunal is justified in setting aside the well reasoned order passed by the learned Commissioner especially when the minimum penalty provided under the statute has been imposed - Whether the Commissioner can exercise the power of revision after the expiry of the period of limitation of two years provided under Section 84(5) of the Act held that - Tribunal has merely remanded the matter for giving opportunity we are unable to hold that any substantial question of law arises revenue appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994.
2. Substantial questions of law raised by the Revenue.
3. Delay in filing tax by the assessee.
4. Imposition of penalty on the assessee.
5. Tribunal's decision to set aside the penalty order.
6. Commissioner's power of revision after the expiry of the limitation period.

Analysis:

1. The appeal was filed under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 by the Revenue against the Order dated 30-8-2007 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Revenue proposed substantial questions of law, including issues related to the respondent's conduct in not appearing before the authorities, sufficiency of opportunities granted, imposition of minimum penalty, and the Commissioner's power of revision after the limitation period.

2. The Tribunal set aside the penalty order imposed on the assessee due to a delay in filing tax beyond 96 days. The Tribunal's decision was based on the ground that the assessee was not given a proper opportunity. The appeal was heard, and it was noted that the Tribunal had remanded the matter solely for the purpose of providing an opportunity to the assessee. Consequently, the court found that no substantial question of law arose from the Tribunal's decision.

3. The court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that since the Tribunal had remanded the matter for the sole purpose of granting an opportunity to the assessee, there was no basis for finding any substantial question of law. The decision highlighted the importance of providing adequate opportunities to parties involved in legal proceedings, especially in cases involving penalties and revisions after the limitation period.

This detailed analysis covers the issues raised in the legal judgment, focusing on the grounds for appeal, the Tribunal's decision, and the court's final ruling on the matter.