9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 794X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has power to condone the delay upto maximum period of three months whereas in the present case, the appeal was filed on 29.05.2014 after the delay of more than one and half years. This issue has been considered by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of SINGH ENTERPRISES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAMSHEDPUR [ 2007 (12) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT] wherein the Hon ble Supreme Court after discussing the power of the Commissioner (Appeals) to condone the delay and held that Plea that , because of lack of experience in business there was delay, is not a adequate reason. Thus, there is no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) - appeal of appellant dismissed. - HON BLE M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... revealed that, on the gross receipts of Rs. 1,18,59,022/-, they had evaded service tax of Rs. 12,96,787/-(including cesses). The benefit of cum-tax value was extended to the appellant while calculating their service tax liability. It also appeared that the appellant had suppressed the material facts of providing the taxable services from the department with intend to evade payment of service tax. 3. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant for recovery of Service tax of Rs. 12,96,787/-(including cesses) under proviso(1) to Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 (for brevity the Act') by invoking the extended period of limitation along with interest under Section 75 of the Act, respectively. Penal action under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed before him on 19.05.2014 which is more than one and half year later. 6. Heard both the parties and perused the case records. 7. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant were under a bonafide belief that the decision in the case of appeal filed by General Manager, Punjab Roadways, Ludhiana will be applicable to them as the issue involved therein is identical. He further submitted that the appellant is a State Government Undertaking engaged in providing state utility services of transportation to the public and had never intended to evade any tax. He also submitted that in the interest of justice, the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned. 8. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submitted that the Ld. Commis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nation offered for the abnormal delay of nearly 20 months is that the appellant concern was practically closed after 1998 and it was only opened for some short period. From the application for condonation of delay, it appears that the appellant has categorically accepted that on receipt of order the same was immediately handed over to the consultant for filing an appeal. If that is so, the plea that because of lack of experience in business there was delay does not stand to be reason. I.T.C. s case (supra) was rendered taking note of the peculiar background facts of the case. In that case there was no law declared by this Court that even though the Statute prescribed a particular period of limitation, this Court can direct condonation. That ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
