2013 (5) TMI 109 - AT - Service Tax

Condonation of delay - applicant filed these four appeals with a delay of 53 days to 246 days - Commercial Training and Coaching services - Held that - Applicant failed to give a valid reasoning for such a long delay except the Medical Certificate dt. 29.4.2011 of the Chartered Accountant. It is seen from the Tribunal Order dated 18.4.2011 as referred by the assessee that the applicant engaged counsel to appear hearing before this Tribunal. So, the contention of the assessee that the delay was caused due to sickness of the C.A., cannot be accepted - COD applications dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Delay in filing appeals, Condonation of delay, Sickness of Chartered Accountant, Negligence or inaction, Tribunal's decision

Analysis:
The judgment dealt with applications for condonation of delay in filing appeals, where a common issue was involved. The applicant had filed four appeals with delays ranging from 53 days to 246 days. The appellant, a proprietorship firm, engaged a Chartered Accountant to prepare the appeal, but the delay was attributed to the sickness of the Chartered Accountant, as evidenced by a medical certificate. The tax was demanded on Commercial Training and Coaching services, and the appellant claimed that the delay was not due to negligence or inaction on their part.

The Revenue's representative argued that the medical certificate indicated the Chartered Accountant's hospitalization and subsequent rest period, but the applicant did not take any initiative for filing the appeal during this time. The Tribunal noted that the delay spanned from 22.12.2010 to 5.2.2013. Despite the medical certificate, the Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide a valid reason for the significant delay. Additionally, the Tribunal referenced a previous order where the applicant engaged counsel to appear before the Tribunal, undermining the argument that the delay was solely due to the Chartered Accountant's sickness. As a result, the Tribunal dismissed all condonation of delay applications, appeals, and stay petitions.

In conclusion, the Tribunal rejected the condonation of delay applications and dismissed the appeals and stay petitions due to the extended delay and lack of substantial justification beyond the medical certificate. The judgment underscores the importance of timely action and the need for valid reasons when seeking condonation of delay in legal proceedings.