2019 (4) TMI 936 - AT - Service Tax

Condonation of delay of 1786 days in filing the appeal - Delay on the ground that appellant was mis-advised by his auditors - proper justification for the delay or not - Held that - Since, the appellant had the advice of his accountant as well as his auditors there is no reason for him to have delayed filing an appeal until he got a notice from the department for recovery of the arrears. The delay is inordinate and the explanation given is not convincing enough to condone it. The application for condonation of 1786 days delay is rejected - Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal, Justification for Delay, Ambiguity in Impugned Order

Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal:
The appellant filed an application seeking condonation of a delay of 1786 days in filing an appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 07/2013 (V-II) ST dated 01.03.2013. The appellant, through the counsel, explained that the delay was due to not being well-educated and relying on guidance from the accountant and auditors. The appellant approached the auditors upon receiving the Order-in-Appeal, and after subsequent correspondence with the department, filed the appeal on 25.04.2018. The appellant requested the delay be condoned and the appeal accepted.

Justification for Delay:
The departmental representative argued that the delay was inordinate and lacked proper justification. It was contended that if the appellant was advised by auditors and accountants, there should have been no difficulty in understanding the order passed by the first appellate authority. The department emphasized the lack of convincing reasons for the delay.

Ambiguity in Impugned Order:
Upon reviewing the submissions and the impugned order, the Tribunal found no ambiguity in the order as alleged by the appellant. The impugned order only modified the Order-in-Original in specific paragraphs. Given that the appellant had the guidance of both the accountant and auditors, there was no valid reason for the delay in filing the appeal until prompted by a notice from the department for arrears recovery. The Tribunal deemed the delay excessive and the explanation insufficient for condonation.

In conclusion, the Tribunal rejected the application for condonation of the 1786 days delay, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The decision was pronounced in the Open Court on 29.01.2019.