Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Zaverbhai Vitthalbhai Gopani vs Cgst & Central Excise Bhavnagar on 26 September, 2024
Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal
West Zonal Bench at Ahmedabad
REGIONAL BENCH-COURT NO. 3
Service Tax Appeal No. 10250 of 2024 - DB
(Arising out of OIA-BHV-EXCUS-000-APP-365-2023 dated 28/12/2023 passed by
Commissioner (Appeals) of GST & Central Excise- Rajkot)
ZAVERBHAI VITTHALBHAI GOPANI ........Appellant
A/404 Sky Icon Ved Gurukul Road
Katargam, Surat
Gujarat- 395003
VERSUS
Commissioner of Central Excise
and Service Tax - CGST &
Central Excise Bhavnagar ......Respondent
Siddhi Sadan, Plot No. 67-76/B-I Narayan Upadhyay Marg, Bhavnagar, Gujarat- 364001 With Service Tax Appeal No. 10251 of 2024 - DB Arising out of OIA-BHV-EXCUS-000-APP-366-2023 dated 28/12/2023 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) of GST & Central Excise- Rajkot) PARESH ZAVERBHAI GOPANI ........Appellant Plot No. 742, Haweliwali Street, Vijayrahnagar, Bhavnagar VERSUS Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax - CGST & Central Excise Bhavnagar ......Respondent Siddhi Sadan, Plot No. 67-76/B-I Narayan Upadhyay Marg, Bhavnagar, Gujarat- 364001 APPEARANCE:
Shri V J Doshi, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Himanshu P Shrimali, Superintendent (AR)for the Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL), MR. RAMESH NAIR HON'BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL), MR. C L MAHAR Final Order No. 12182-12183/2024 DATE OF HEARING: 13.09.2024 DATE OF DECISION: 26.09.2024 RAMESH NAIR These appeals are directed against the impugned orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), who rejected the appeals of the appellants on the ground of time bar. According to him the appeals were filed after more
2|Page ST/10250-10251/2024-DB than 30 days. As per the finding of the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) considering the Proviso to Section 85 (3) of the Finance Act, 1994 it was held that since there is a delay more than 30 days after the normal period of 60 days for filing of appeal, more than 30 days delay cannot be condoned. Accordingly, the appeals were dismissed on time bar.
2. We find that there is no dispute that there is delay of two days and not three days after the condonable period of 30 days and as per the settled legal position followed by the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) there is no power wasted in the Commissioner (Appeals) to condone the delay of more than 30 days and also considering the Hon'ble High Court Judgment in the case of M/s. Singh Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur and Others (2008) 3 SCC (70) since, the delay is more than 30 days the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly rejected the appeal on the ground of time bar. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the said impugned order. The same is liable to be upheld.
3. Accordingly, we uphold the impugned orders and dismiss the appeals.
(Pronounced in the open court on 26.09.2024) (RAMESH NAIR) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) (C L MAHAR) MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Raksha