2016 (12) TMI 1184

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... or the Respondent ORDER The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 11.11.2014 passed by the Commissioner (A) vide which the Commissioner (A) rejected the appeal of the appellant for non-compliance of Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994. 2.  Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant provides services under the category of Business Auxiliary Services and I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... before the Commissioner (A). Though the due date for filing the appeal was on 8.12.2012 but the appellant could file the appeal only on 18.12.2012 as their authorised signatory was on continuous tour, therefore, there was a delay of 10 days in filing the appeal, which was within the condonable limit by the learned Commissioner (A). The Commissioner (A) vide his order dated 11.11.2014 dismissed the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... condone the delay at the relevant time which was 30 days after the expiry of two months for filing the appeal on sufficient ground. In support of his submission, he relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Affiliated Computer Services (I) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CST, Bangalore: 2012 (28) S.T.R. 432 (Kar.) wherein the Honble Karnataka High Court overruled the judgment of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X