9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 528X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ling appeal by Appellant as the person who was looking after Service Tax has left their company and as service tax is a new subject they could not file Appeal in time - Appellant is not disputing the payment of service tax which they have already paid, therefore the appellant is not likely to gain anything for not filing the Appeal in time - refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of pre-deposit I take up the Appeal itself for disposal. 3. The Appellant did not dispute the classification of the service or service tax. The Appellant is contesting only the penalty imposed in this case. The contention is that they have received the order-in-Appeal on 01.03.2011 whereas they had filed Appeal on 15.09.2008. They had filed Appeal before commissioner (A) after 23 days after the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been shown though the delay was under condonable time limit. 5. I have considered the submissions and perused the record. Learned Commissioner(Appeal) has rejected their Appeal only on the ground of delayed filing of Appeal. Section 85 of Finance Act, 1994 prescribes 3 (three) months time for filing of Appeal. The case is condonable within further 3 (three) months. The proviso to sub-section 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) ELT 185 (SC) , Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- 1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeallate. 2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
