2013 (10) TMI 482

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r 2011 but resigned thereafter - the problem has arisen because of genuine administrative and unavoidable difficulties and therefore the COD has to be allowed - At the same time there was negligence on the part of the headquarters itself in not ascertaining whether the appeal has been filed or not - while the COD can be allowed, it cannot be free - the appellant is directed to deposit an amount. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the delay occurred because the Manager of the Cochin Unit had resigned and the Manager of Chennai Unit who was looking after the branch made arrangement for filing the appeal in September 2011 but resigned thereafter. The headquarters of the appellant, which is in Delhi, was under the impression that the appeal has been filed whereas apparently no action was taken in the Chennai office. I find th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ere will be condonation of delay. 2. Further, I find that the issue involved is imposition of penalty under Section 76 which has been imposed by the Commissioner by invoking his powers under Section 84 of Finance Act, 1994 and there is a decision of the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CST, Bangalore Vs. Motor World [2012(27) STR 225(Kar.)], which is in favour of the appellant. In .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X