9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1930X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for non-compliance of order demanding deposit of duty; thus intervening in the decision of Tribunal is not justified – Found no merit in appeal – Decided in favour of Revenue. - Service Tax Appeal No. 25 of 2014 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 12-8-2014 - AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND FATEH DEEP SINGH JJ. Sudhir Malhotra for the appellant. JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed by the assessee under Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ally in extraordinary circumstances when appellant is bed ridden and in pitiable state of health? e) Whether the provision of section 5 of Limitation Act is applicable? 2. The facts necessary for adjudication of the present appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The appellant during the period June 2007 to March 2009 provided their buses to Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, Patiala (PRTC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /- plus Higher Secondary Education Cess ₹ 4764/-) along with interest and penalty. The adjudicating authority vide order dated 2.8.2011 (Annexure A-2) confirmed the demand of service tax of ₹ 4,90,679/- along with interest and also imposed penalty. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal on 18.7.2012 before the Commissioner (Appeals). As the appeal was barred by limitation, an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llenged the levy of duty before the Commissioner (Appeals). Since the appeal was barred by time, the appellant filed an application for condonation of delay. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 11.10.2012 (Annexure A-3) dismissed the appeal being barred by limitation. The appellant challenged the said order in appeal and the Tribunal vide order dated 1.4.2014 (Annexure A-4) directed the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
