9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 981X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he consultant – Tribunal held that delay in filing is due to negligence and inaction on the part of the Appellant – Held That:- Consultant of appellant having suffered from certain medical ailments, which cannot be stated as negligence and inaction - Delay in filing the appeal should be condoned – Appeal allowed in favour of the Appellant. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax dated 16-1-2009 was confirmed which raised a demand of ₹ 1,60,055/- including Service Tax and education cess, demand of interest under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 and imposed penalty equivalent to amount of service tax and further penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. 3. In the petition for condonation of delay, the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtificate in support of the medical condition of the consultant. The Revenue did not dispute the correctness of the statement given by the consultant who appeared for the appellant nor did they doubt her health condition. The Tribunal held that it is a case of negligence and inaction on the part of the appellant and there is no sufficient reason for condonation of delay. Aggrieved by such order of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such a finding. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Balkishan Mathur reported in (2014) 1 SCC 592 pointed out that in a situation where there has been gross negligence or deliberate inaction or lack of bona fides, broad and liberal view is always taken so as to advance substantial justice instead of terminating the proceedings of the technical ground of limitation. Unle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
