Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
R.K.S Motor (P) Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 23 September, 2014
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Final Order No. 21751 / 2014 Application(s) Involved: ST/Stay/27213/2013 in ST/26881/2013-DB Appeal(s) Involved: ST/26881/2013-DB [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 29/2013 dated 19/02/2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Hyderabad] R.K.S Motor (P) Ltd. 6-3-905, Saboo Towers, Raj Bhawan Road, Somajiguda Hyderabad - 500 082 Andhra Pradesh Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Hyderabad-II L.B Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad 500 004 Andhra Pradesh Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Mr. S.V. Ratnam, Advocate Rangrez Street, Visakhapatnam 530 001 For the Appellant Mr. S. Teli, AR For the Respondent CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V. MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI S.K. MOHANTY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Date of Hearing: 23/09/2014 Date of Decision: 23/09/2014 Order Per: B.S.V. MURTHY The appeal has been dismissed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that appellants have not explained the delay of 29 days in filing the appeal before him to his satisfaction. The appellants explanation and the consideration thereof is in para 7 of the impugned order which is reproduced below:
Thus, the normal appealable period in respect of an order relating to service tax (& interest or penalty thereon) is two months. The additional time period, for sufficient cause shown for failure in presenting the appeal within the said normal period of two months, is extended to further period of one month. Therefore, the request of the appellant to condone the delay with the sole reason that their advocate/consultant was on a foreign tour and they could not file the appeal in time. I find that this is not sufficient cause for failure to file the appeal within the normal period, hence I am not inclined to accept the cause shown by the appellants as sufficient cause for preventing them in filing the appeal within the normal period or allow it to be filed with a further period of one month.
2. In our opinion for the lapse of the advocate or because of the fact that counsel did not advise them suitably, the appellant should not suffer. Therefore we set aside the decision and condone the delay in filing the appeal and remand the matter to the learned Commissioner (Appeals) for considering the appeal afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say principles of natural justice will be observed while considering the matter afresh. (Operative portion of the order has been pronounced in open court on 23.09.2014) (S.K. MOHANTY) JUDICIAL MEMBER (B.S.V. MURTHY) TECHNICAL MEMBER iss