Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Kone Elevators (India) Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Service Tax, Chennai on 25 February, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, CHENNAI
ST/Misc./762/2011 in ST/230/2011 (By Deptt.)
ST/COD/191/11 in ST/S/152/11 and ST/230/2011 (By Assessee)
(Arising out of Order-in-Original No.16/2010-S.Tax/Ch. IV dated 28.9.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai IV, Chennai)
For approval and signature:
Honble Shri P.K. Das, Judicial Member
Honble Shri Mathew John, Technical Member
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for Publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether the Members wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
M/s. Kone Elevators (India) Pvt. Ltd. Appellant
Vs.
Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai Respondent
Appearance Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, Advocate, for the Appellants Shri D.P. Naidu, Addl. Commr. (AR) for the Respondent CORAM Honble Shri P.K. Das, Judicial Member Honble Shri Mathew John, Technical Member Date of Hearing: 25.02.2013 Final Order No. ____________ Per P.K. Das The Department has filed an application for change of cause title. The learned Additional Commissioner (AR) submits that they have filed this application for amendment of the cause title of the appeal insofar as the words Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai IV Commissionerate would be substituted by Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai. He drew our attention to paragraphs 2 and 3 of the application, which is reproduced below:-
It is submitted that the appeal pertains to jurisdiction of Service Tax Commissionerate. The Show Cause Notice was assigned to Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai IV Commissionerate by the Chief Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai Zone in exercise of the powers conferred by Notification No. 6/2009-Service Tax dated 30.1.2009. The show-cause notice No. 64/2009 dated 20.3.2009 issued against M/s. Kone Elevators India Pvt. Ltd. has been reassigned to the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai IV Commissionerate for the purpose of adjudication by the Chief Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax vide letter C. No. IV/16/123/2009-CZO (ST) dated 8.2010.
In view of the above, it is requested that in appeal No. ST/230/2011 filed by M/s. Kone Eelvators India Pvt. Ltd. against Order-in-Original No. 16/2010 dated 28.9.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai IV Commissionerate, the respondent name may please be changed as Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai instead of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai IV Commissionerate.
2. After hearing the learned Additional Commissioner (AR) and on perusal of the records, we allow the application and the Registry is directed to correct the cause title insofar as the words written Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai IV Commissionerate would be substituted by Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai. The assessee is also directed to mention the correct cause title in further proceedings. The application is disposed of in the above terms.
3. The applicant has filed this application for condonation of delay of filing of the appeal with 98 days.
4. After hearing both sides, we find that the appellant in the affidavit explained that Shri C.V.S. Krishnakumar, General Manager (Taxation & Company Secretary) could not prepare and finalise the appeal within the stipulated period on account of his emergency travel due to personal family exigencies and year-end professional budget constraints which also took a toll on his health for a short duration during December 2011 to January 2011. The learned counsel produces the medical certificate dated 4.3.2011 certifying that Shri C.V.S. Krishnakumar was advised to take complete rest from 15.12.2010 to 28.2.2011. It is seen from memo of appeal that on 5.10.2010 they received the impugned order. On a query from the Bench, the learned counsel submits that the last date of filing appeal was on 5.1.2011 and the appeal was filed on 8.4.2011.
5. The Tribunal may admit an appeal after the expiry of the stipulated period, if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for non-presenting it within the said period. We considered the submission of the learned AR that the medical certificate issued by a skin specialist advising to take rest for suffering from hepatitis is misconceived. We find that there is no explanation in respect of delay after 28.2.2011. In view of that there is no reason to condone the delay of filing of the appeal. Accordingly, the COD application is dismissed. Consequently the appeal along with stay application is dismissed.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(Mathew John) (P.K. Das)
Technical Member Judicial Member
Rex
2