The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot condone delay beyond 30 days.
The bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that there can be no scintilla of doubt that the appellate authority has no power to allow the appeal to be presented beyond the period of 30 days after expiry of initial 60 days.
The appellant/assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) on 18.10.2017. In Form ST-4 filed with the appeal it was stated that the order dated 28.02.2017 was received on 03.08.2017. The appeal was signed by Sangram Singh as partner of the appellant.
In the memo of appeal filed before the Commissioner (Appeals), the appellant stated that it is a partnership concern with two existing partners. Along with the appeal, an application for condonation of delay was filed stating inter-alia that appellant partnership firm was re-constituted on 10.06.2016 with two partners, namely, Aniruddha Pratap Singh and Sangram Singh and both the partners were cousins.
The order passed by the Joint Commissioner was received by Aniruddha Pratap Singh, as partner of the firm, on 07.04.2017 but he did not inform Sangram Singh about the said order and nor did he file any appeal. It was only when the Jurisdictional Range Officer sent a recovery letter that Sangram Singh came to know about the order and after he visited the range office, a duplicate copy of the order was provided, whereafter the appeal was filed.
The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that as the appeal was presented beyond the period specified under section 85(3A) of the Finance Act and the Commissioner (Appeals) could not condone any delay beyond one month after the expiry of the normal period of two months, the appeal had to be dismissed.
The tribunal held that as the appeal was preferred by the appellant before the Commissioner (Appeals) even beyond the extended period of one month after the expiry of the statutory period of two months, it was liable to be dismissed and was rightly dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals).
Case Details
Case Title: M/s. M N Singh Versus Join Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax
Case No.: Service Tax Appeal No. 51530 of 2018
Date: 09.04.2025
Counsel For Appellant: Prashant Shukla
Counsel For Respondent: Jaya Kumari
Read More: No Suppression, Just Departmental Negligence: CESTAT Denies Extended Period In CENVAT Credit Dispute
