M/S Dr. Bhupendra Beer Singh vs. Commissioner CGST And Central Excies And Another
Held
The High Court held that the CESTAT correctly applied the law as settled by the Supreme Court in M/s Singh Enterprises versus CCE Jamshedpur. The Supreme Court's decision established that the power of the Commissioner (Appeals) to condone the delay in filing an appeal under Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994, is limited to a period of one month after the expiry of the normal period. In this case, the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was significantly beyond 30 days. Therefore, the CESTAT's finding that the appeal was barred by limitation and its rejection of the appeal were not infirm. The High Court found no reason to interfere with the CESTAT's order.
Facts
The appellant, M/s Dr. Bhupendra Beer Singh, filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against an order. The appellant received the order on May 8, 2017, and filed their appeal on November 7, 2017. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal as barred by limitation. The appellant then appealed to the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The CESTAT, by an order dated April 8, 2019, rejected the appeal, holding that the power to condone delay under Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994, was limited to one month after the expiry of the normal period, and the delay in this case exceeded that limit. The High Court is hearing an appeal against the CESTAT's order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the CESTAT erred in law by holding that the power of the Commissioner (Appeals) to condone delay under Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994, is strictly limited to one month after the expiry of the normal period for filing an appeal. Contentions: Petitioner/Appellant: The appellant's contentions are not recorded in the judgment. The judgment only states that the appeal was rejected by the Tribunal after rejecting a request for adjournment. Respondent/Revenue: The respondent's contentions are not explicitly detailed, but the judgment indicates that the Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court's decision in M/s Singh Enterprises versus CCE Jamshedpur (2008 (221) E.L.T. 163 (SC)) to conclude that the power to condone delay under Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994, cannot be stretched beyond one month.
Sections Cited
Section 85(3A)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 7 Case :- CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL No. - 121 of 2019 Appellant :- M/S Dr. Bhupendra Beer Singh Respondent :- Commissioner Cgst And Central Excies And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Anshul Pathak,Jitendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- B.K.Singh Raghuvanshi Hon'ble Biswanath Somadder,J. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. This appeal under section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, has been taken out by the appellant - M/s Dr. Bhupendra Beer Singh, in respect of a judgment and order dated 8th April, 2019, passed by Custom, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, Regional Bench - Court No.
For convenience, the impugned judgment and order is reproduced hereinbelow in its entirety:- "After rejecting the request for adjournment, we proceed to decide the appeal itself, inasmuch as a very short issue is involved in the present case.
On going through the impugned order, we find that Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal as barred by limitation. It is seen that the order impugned before Commissioner (Appeals) was received by the appellant on 08.05.2017, as disclosed by them only, whereas appeal was filed on 07.11.2017 In terms of the provisions of Section 85 (3
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.