2018 (3) TMI 863 - AT - Service Tax

Condonation of delay in filing appeal - refund claim - time limitation - Held that - the last date to file the appeal was 19.7.2015 which was a Sunday i.e. a non-working day for the Central Government offices. In such a case, the last date for filing the appeal would shift to the next working day i.e. 20.7.2015 on which date the appeal was admittedly to have been filed. In fact the appeal was filed within the limitation of two months, but the Commissioner (Appeals) has wrongly computed the period of limitation in filing the appeal and has wrongly arrived at a finding that the appeal was filed after the expiry of two months and one day from the date of receipt of the order-in-original. Matter remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) with a direction to decide the same on merits after complying with the principles of natural justice - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in filing appeals condonation
2. Rejection of refund claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944
3. Interpretation of limitation period for filing appeal under Section 85 of the Finance Act

Delay in filing appeals - Condonation:
The appellant, registered for banking and financial services, filed a refund claim for a specific period. The adjudicating authority rejected the claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals) who dismissed it as time-barred under Section 85 of the Finance Act. The appellant contended that the appeal was filed within the two-month limit, considering a public holiday. The Tribunal found that the appeal was indeed filed within the limitation period. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, setting aside the impugned order, and remanding the case to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on merits.

Rejection of refund claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944:
The appellant, a service provider, filed a refund claim for services exported without service tax payment. The adjudicating authority rejected a portion of the claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as applicable to Service Tax. The appellant appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals), who dismissed it as time-barred under Section 85 of the Finance Act. The Tribunal, after hearing both parties and examining the records, found that the appeal was filed within the prescribed two-month period. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order and remanding the case for a decision on merits.

Interpretation of limitation period for filing appeal under Section 85 of the Finance Act:
The appellant challenged the rejection of their refund claim, arguing that the appeal was filed within the two-month limit, considering a public holiday. The Tribunal analyzed the timeline and found that the appeal was indeed filed within the limitation period. The Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) wrongly computed the period of limitation. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, and remanding the case for a decision on merits after ensuring compliance with the principles of natural justice.