2015 (9) TMI 627 - HC - Central Excise

Condonation of delay - Delay of 69 days - Held that - Tribunal has stated in the impugned order that the non- availability of the Managing Director is not shown to have resulted in the business of the appellant to a standstill, and therefore, there is no reason to condone the delay, we think that the totality of the grounds raised in the appeal ought to have also been relevant consideration for viewing the situation as one where ends of justice would be satisfied, if delay is condoned on terms. This is because, if that course is adopted, that would pave way for better dispensation of justice by extending an opportunity of hearing to the appellant and the establishment to have a proper disposal of the matter relating to service tax on merits, rather than on default. - impugned order of the Tribunal is set aside and the application seeking condonation of delay in instituting the appeal before the Tribunal will stand allowed on condition that the appellant remits to the Revenue an amount of ₹ 10,000 - Delay condoned conditionally.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in filing an appeal challenging imposition of penalty and levy of service tax.
2. Power of the Tribunal to condone delay under Section 35B(5) of the Central Excise Act, 1994.
3. Consideration of grounds raised in the appeal for condonation of delay.
4. Setting aside the impugned order and allowing the application seeking condonation of delay on certain conditions.

The judgment by the Kerala High Court addressed the issue of delay in filing an appeal challenging the imposition of penalty and levy of service tax. The appellant had filed the appeal out of the prescribed time limit of 120 days, delayed by 69 days, citing the absence of the Managing Director due to business activities as the reason for the delay. The Court noted that the Tribunal has the discretionary power to condone such delays as reflected in Section 35B(5) of the Central Excise Act, 1994. The Court emphasized that the totality of grounds raised in the appeal should be considered for condonation of delay, as it would ensure better dispensation of justice by allowing a proper hearing on the merits of the case rather than default judgment.

The Court set aside the impugned order of the Tribunal and allowed the application seeking condonation of delay, subject to the condition that the appellant remits an amount of Rs. 10,000 as costs within ten days. Upon receipt of the remittance, the appeal would be further considered in accordance with the law. This decision highlights the importance of considering all relevant factors in condoning delays to ensure fair and just adjudication in matters concerning taxation and penalties.