Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt Ltd vs Kanpur on 6 February, 2020

CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                    ALLAHABAD

                    REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO.I

                  Excise Appeal No.70899 of 2018

  (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.135-CE/APPL/KNP/ADG-NACIN/2017-18
  dated 28/03/2018 passed by Additional Director General National Academy of
  Customs, Indirect Taxes and Narcotics (ZTI), Kanpur)

  M/s Shubham Goldiee Masale Pvt. Ltd.                    .....Appellant
  (184-185-B, Dada Nagar, Kanpur-208022)
                                   VERSUS

  The Commissioner, CGST &
  Service Tax, Kanpur                                   .....Respondent

(117/7, Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur-208005) APPEARANCE:

Ms. Stuti Saggi, Advocate for Appellant Shri Shiv Pratap Singh, Authorized Representative for Respondent CORAM :
Hon'ble Mrs. ARCHANA WADHWA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Hon'ble Mr. ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) FINAL ORDER NO.70168/2020 DATE OF HEARING : 06 February, 2020 DATE OF DECISION : 06 February, 2020 ARCHANA WADHWA Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal as barred by limitation by refusing to condone the delay of 12 days in filing the appeal before him. Such delay has occurred on account of the illness of the advocate who was confined to bed. While rejecting appeal as barred by limitation, he has also referred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Singh Enterprises V/s Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur reported in 2008 (221) E.L.T. 163 (S.C.) which lays down that Commissioner (Appeals) has no jurisdiction to condone the 2 Excise Appeal No.70899 of 2018 delay beyond the period specified in the Act. We note that reference to the said decision was not called for inasmuch as the delay was only of 12 days which was within his power to condone.

2. In view of the above we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to Commissioner (Appeals) for the decision on merits.

(Dictated and Pronounced in open Court) Sd/-

(Archana Wadhwa) Member (Judicial) Sd/-

(Anil G. Shakkarwar) Member (Technical) akarshak