9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1664X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve been condoned by this Court in some cases - reliance placed in Apotex Research Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Union of India [ 2017 (1) TMI 872 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ] where it was held that this Court is of the opinion that the reasons assigned by the petitioner-assessee appear to be of sufficient and the delay deserved to be condoned by the Commissioner of Appeals. However, in view of the statutory limit on his powers, this Court exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction is of the opinion that the said delay deserves to be condoned. Since the present case is also of the same nature, the present petition is also disposed of in same terms and condoning the delay, the appeal is restored to the said respondent-Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), My ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals) -(1) Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under this Act by a Central Excise Officer lower in rank than a Commissioner of Central Excise may appeal to the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) hereafter in this Chapter referred to as the Commissioner (appeals) within sixty days from the date of the communication to him of such decision or order: Provided that the Commissioner (Appeals) may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of sixty days, allow it to be presented within a further period of thirty days." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner assessee has submitted that since the original order was communicated to the peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Article 226 of the Constitution and to interfere with the order of the original authority or the appellate authority, as the case may be. In order to find out as to whether the case is fit for exercising of the power under Article 226 of the Constitution, we may record that as per the decision of the Delhi High court, Rule 5, on the basis of which the original authority has passed the order for levying the tax is held to be ultra vires to Sec. 67 of the Act. Further, the matter may fall in the realm of correct interpretation of Sec. 67 as to whether the expenses reimbursed by the consumer to the service provider, can be included for the purpose of computation of the service tax or not. We do not propose to express any further view on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or maintaining the said appeal have been complied with by the petitioner-assessee. 6. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the opinion that the reasons assigned by the petitioner-assessee appear to be of sufficient and the delay deserved to be condoned by the Commissioner of Appeals. However, in view of the statutory limit on his powers, this Court exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction is of the opinion that the said delay deserves to be condoned. It is hereby condoned. 7. Moreover this Court is of the opinion that discretion ought to have been given to the Appellate Authorities under the Act to condone such delays, if caused by sufficient reason. Be that as it may. 8. In the present case, the delay of 184 days is condoned a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
