2017 (11) TMI 539 - AT - Service Tax

Condonation of delay in filing appeal - Held that - Appellant being a Municipality and has enormous responsibilities of the nature aforesaid, if its appeal is thrown at the threshold without condonation of delay, the public body shall suffer and public interest would be hampered. Therefore the delay is condoned. Looking to the co-operative attitude of the appellant, it is considered proper to grant an opportunity to the appellant to reconcile the facts and figures for determination of appropriate liability so that Revenue s interest shall be protected. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues: Condonation of delay in filing appeals, reconciliation of service tax liability, remand to Adjudicating Authority for re-adjudication.

Condonation of Delay:
The appellant sought condonation of delay in filing appeals due to inadequacy of staff, employees engaged in various official duties like Aadhaar Card verification, election work, and Census work. The appellant, being a Municipality, argued that if the delay was not condoned, public interest would suffer. The Tribunal, following the principle established in the case of N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy, decided to condone the delay of 1064 days, 666 days, and 199 days in different appeals, emphasizing that the cause of delay was significant rather than the length of delay. Consequently, all 20 MAs (COD) were allowed, and the appeals were remanded for further proceedings.

Reconciliation of Service Tax Liability:
Upon legal advice, the appellant reconciled some facts and figures and paid &8377; 1.81 crores towards its service tax liability, which was accepted by the Revenue. The Revenue suggested that the proper determination of liability, interest, and penalty required the appeals to be sent back to the Adjudicating Authority for reconciliation of facts and figures. The Tribunal acknowledged the cooperative attitude of the appellant and decided to grant an opportunity for reconciling the liabilities to protect the Revenue's interest. All appeals were remanded to the Adjudicating Authority with a directive to complete the re-adjudication process by a specified date.

Remand to Adjudicating Authority:
In light of the appellant's cooperation and the necessity to determine the appropriate liability accurately, the Tribunal remanded all 20 appeals to the Adjudicating Authority. The Authority was instructed to re-adjudicate the matters by a specified deadline, with a warning against seeking unnecessary adjournments. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order, documenting the reasons and pleadings of the appellant while applying the appropriate legal principles. This remand aimed at ensuring a fair and thorough re-evaluation of the service tax liability issues involved in the appeals.