2018 (5) TMI 1126 - AT - Service Tax

Condonation of delay of 964 days in filing the appeal - Held that - the appellant have discharged the entire Service Tax liability, therefore, it be said that the delay does not extend any benefit to the appellant by filing the appeal belatedly. Therefore, there is no intention of delaying the appeal to have undue benefit by the applicant. As regards the condonation of delay, the Court must take lenient view particularly in the present case when the applicant have discharged the entire Service Tax liability - delay condoned on imposition of cost. Application for COD allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Condonation of delay in filing an appeal.
2. Consideration of sufficient cause for condonation of delay.
3. Applicability of legal principles for condonation of delay.
4. Comparison of judgments supporting and opposing condonation of delay.

Detailed analysis:
1. The applicant filed a COD application to condone a delay of 964 days in filing the appeal. The applicant agreed to the order passed by the adjudicating authority but disagreed with the quantum of tax and penalty confirmed against them. The department initiated recovery proceedings for the amount adjudged in the order. The appellant paid the entire Service Tax liability but decided to file an appeal due to the department seeking to recover tax liability over and above the due amount. The applicant cited the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding principles for condonation of delay.

2. The Revenue strongly objected to the application, stating that the delay of 964 days was inordinate and lacked sufficient cause for condonation. The Revenue cited various judgments to support their objection, emphasizing that such a delay without sufficient cause should not be condoned.

3. The Tribunal considered both parties' submissions and the records. It noted that the appellant had already discharged the entire Service Tax liability, indicating no intention to delay the appeal for undue benefit. The Tribunal acknowledged the differing judgments on condonation of delay but highlighted the Supreme Court's stance on not depriving litigants of their right to litigation due to filing delays. The Tribunal decided to condone the delay, emphasizing the importance of deciding matters on merit. However, the Tribunal imposed a cost of ?20,000 to be deposited within four weeks from the date of the order.

In conclusion, the Tribunal granted the condonation of delay in filing the appeal, taking a lenient view due to the appellant having paid the entire Service Tax liability. The decision highlighted the importance of deciding matters on merit and ensuring that litigants are not deprived of their right to appeal due to filing delays.