9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 572X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0. The records indicate that when the order was received from the department on 09.07.2020, the appeal was filed in less than two months on 20.08.2020 - the averments made in the delay condonation application and the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the appellant satisfies that the appellant has satisfactorily explained the reasons for not filing the appeal within the stipulated time. The delay having been satisfactorily explained, needs to be condoned and the application is allowed. - DEFECT DIARY SERVICE TAX CONDONATION OF DELAY APPLICATION NO. 50225 OF 2021 & DEFECT DIARY SERVICE TAX APPEAL NO. 51023 of 2020 - MISCELLANEOUS ORDER NO. 74/2021 - Dated:- 27-8-2021 - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA, PRESIDENT AND HON BLE M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t sent by the department. It then came to the knowledge of the appellant that the speed post was received at the factory at Sl. No. 568 in the Inward Register on 28.06.2019, but it was not placed by the receipt clerk before Shri Deepak Gaur. On record is also a letter dated 10.08.2020 sent by the HR Head to the Manager of the appellant stating therein that because of this mistake, the document could not be delivered by his team to Shri Deepak Gaur and that steps have been taken to ensure that such a mistake does not happen in future. To the same effect is an affidavit to the Head HR of the appellant. The applicant has further stated that after receipt of the order from the Commissioner (Appeals), the appeal was filed on 20.08.2020 within ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned Authorized Representative appearing for the Department have been considered. 6. It is not in dispute that the order dated 21.06.2019 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) was sent to the appellant by speed post on 24.06.2019 and it was received by the receipt clerk of the appellant on 28.06.2019, as it clear from the Inward Register maintained by the receipt clerk. The appellant state that steps were not taken to file the appeal since the receipt clerk did not place this order before the Associate Finance and it was only when a telephone call was received from the Department for recovery of the dues that the appellant immediately wrote a letter dated 08.01.2020 to the Commissioner (Appeals) for providing a copy of the order, foll ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egitimately be considered in condoning delay. 10. In the present case, it is seen that though the appellant had sent letters to the department on 08.01.2020 and 02.03.2020 to provide a copy of the order but it was provided only on 09.07.2020. The records indicate that when the order was received from the department on 09.07.2020, the appeal was filed in less than two months on 20.08.2020. 11. We are satisfied from the averments made in the delay condonation application and the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the appellant that the appellant has satisfactorily explained the reasons for not filing the appeal within the stipulated time. The delay having been satisfactorily explained, needs to be condoned and the application i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
