9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1260X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dum is considered to be the relevant date, instead of considering the receipt of the impugned order on 04.07.2012, the last date for filing appeal expired on 18.10.2012. As per the appellant themselves, their Manager (Finance), who was looking after the tax matters was in their service till 1st October 2012 i.e., he left the job only a few days prior to the expiry of the last date. Even during that period of two and half months or more, the appellants have not taken any steps to get the appeal prepared. No evidence that they were taking any steps to file the appeal stand produced before us. As such, even if the appellant’s plea that they came to know about the passing of the impugned order only when the said letter was received by them is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and payment of taxes, received the said order. However as the service tax was confirmed by the Commissioner on the ground of non submission of documents, the said Manager (Finance), by entertaining a belief that such production of documents is required before Commissioner, started looking for such documents. However subsequently the said Shri. G. Kasivisweswar Rao left the job on 1st of October 2012, as he was suffering from mental depression and wanted to float his own consultancy firm. However before leaving the job, the fact of receipt of the said order of Commissioner was not brought to the knowledge of the management and as such no appeal could be filed against the same, well within the period. It is only subsequently when the Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o get the appeal prepared. No evidence that they were taking any steps to file the appeal stand produced before us. Further we find that there is nothing on record to show that the said Shri. G. Kasivisweswar Rao was the "ONLY" concerned person responsible for taking steps for filing an appeal against the impugned order. We also do not find any justification in the appellants contention that the said person was suffering from mental depression and wanted to float his own consultancy and left the job without handing over all the requisite papers to the management or the other responsible person. 5. Otherwise also, as per the learned advocate, the appellant came to know about the passing of the order when the Revenue approached them for rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
