2023 (9) TMI 298 - AT - Service Tax

Rejection of appeal on the ground of time limitation - appellant had not filed condonation of delay application as required under Section 85 (3A) of the Finance Act, 1994 - HELD THAT - The order-in-original against which the appeal was filed was passed on 19.05.2010. The appeal was filed on 17.04.2013. As regards the prescribed period of two months for filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and 30 days for condonable period, the said provision was brought into statute in the Finance Bill, 2012. From Sub Section (3) it is clear that in support of order passed by the learned Adjudicating Authority against which the appeal lies before the Commissioner (Appeals), the appeal shall be presented within three months from the date of receipt of the order. However, in the case of order passed after assent of Finance Bill 2012, the period is 60days plus 30 days as condonable period - In the present case the order-in-original was passed on 19.05.2010 i.e. much before the assent of Finance Bill, 2012 therefore, in spite of the fact that appeal was filed on 17.04.2013, three months normal period is available to the appellant to file appeal. The appellant in the present case has filed appeal within three months from the date of receipt of the order. Therefore, the appeal was filed very muchin the time limit - the impugned order is set-aside and the appeal is allowed by way of remand to the Commissioner (Appeals) for passing a fresh order on merit of the issue. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment deals with the issue of time-bar in filing an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) under the Finance Act, 1994.

Summary:
The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD considered an appeal where the learned Commissioner (Appeals) had rejected the appeal as time-barred without delving into the merits of the case. The appellant had not filed a condonation of delay application as required under Section 85 (3A) of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant contended that the appeal was filed within the prescribed normal time period of three months, as the order was passed before the enactment of Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal noted that the order-in-original was passed on 19.05.2010, and the appeal was filed on 17.04.2013. The relevant provision of Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 was analyzed, which stipulated different time limits for filing appeals based on the date of the order. It was observed that since the order was passed before the assent of Finance Bill, 2012, the appellant had three months to file the appeal, which was done in this case. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision on the merits of the issue.

The judgment clarifies the time limits for filing appeals under the Finance Act, 1994, based on the date of the order-in-original. It emphasizes the importance of adhering to the prescribed timeframes for filing appeals and the necessity of following the statutory provisions for condonation of delay where applicable. The Tribunal's decision to allow the appeal by remanding the case underscores the significance of procedural compliance in legal matters and the need for a thorough examination of the relevant statutory provisions before determining the timeliness of an appeal.