2019 (8) TMI 258 - AT - Service Tax

Condonation of delay of around 556 days in filing appeal - appellant submits that the said delay occurred on account of death of his wife on 05.03.2016, as, the appellant was in complete shock - HELD THAT - The appellant had not shown that on account of his being shocked and depressed, all the other activities including his business activity was stopped by him. Admittedly, an unfortunate incident happened on 05.03.2016 but we note that the appeal stands filed in February, 2018 i.e. almost after a period of two years and during the said period of two years the appellant attended all other works including his business. The said fact cannot be adopted as a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the present appeal. There were admittedly latches on the part of the assessee and such a huge delay cannot be condoned for even an unfortunate incident having happened in March, 2016. Monetary amount involved in the appeal - HELD THAT - The amount of service tax involved in the present case is much on the lower side i.e. ₹ 62,141/- and the issue according to learned A.R. is also settled against the assessee - As such, there is no justifiable reason to condone the delay. COD application dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Delay in filing appeal, condonation of delay, lower amount of service tax involved

Delay in filing appeal:
The appellant filed an appeal against an order after a delay of 556 days, attributing the delay to the death of his wife. The appellant claimed that due to shock and depression, he could not file the appeal in time. However, the respondent argued that the delay was unjustifiable as the appeal was filed almost two years after the normal period of limitation. The tribunal noted that the appellant failed to demonstrate that all activities, including business, were halted due to the unfortunate incident. Despite the appellant's claim of shock and depression, the tribunal found no reasonable cause for the prolonged delay in filing the appeal.

Condonation of delay:
The tribunal considered the appellant's plea for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Despite the appellant's assertion that the death of his wife caused the delay, the tribunal observed that the appellant continued with other activities, including business, during the two-year period before filing the appeal. The tribunal emphasized that the appellant's reasons were insufficient to justify the delay, especially considering the lower amount of service tax involved in the case and the settled nature of the issue against the assessee. Consequently, the tribunal rejected the condonation of delay application, leading to the dismissal of the appeal as time-barred.

Lower amount of service tax involved:
The tribunal highlighted that the service tax amount in question was relatively low, amounting to ?62,141. Additionally, the respondent argued that the issue was settled against the assessee. Given the minimal amount of tax involved and the lack of substantial grounds for condoning the delay, the tribunal found no justifiable reason to grant the condonation of delay. Consequently, the tribunal rejected the application and dismissed the appeal on the grounds of being time-barred due to the uncondoned delay.