Taxindiaonline.com Taxindiaonline.com Taxindiainternational.com HRindiaonline.com
 
LOGIN
Forgot Password |  Register
Tuesday , January 27, 2015 | Updated : Jan 27, 18:43 IST
Income Tax    Customs    Excise    Service Tax    FEMA    DGFT    SEZ    Misc    Pitara    Budget   
About Us Contact Us Advertise
Taxindiaonline.com Taxindiaonline.com Taxindiainternational.com
NEWS FLASH
 
Biotech Chief presents biotechnology roadmap; Sector to grow to USD 100 bn by 2025 (See 'Mixed Buzz') CBEC Event: FM once again harps on non-adversarial tax administration (See 'Mixed Buzz') For Every Reform, there is equal & opposite counter-reform (See ' ICE CUBES') ST - Once appeal filed by paying pre-deposit amount of 7.5% of tax demand in terms of s.35F of CEA, 1944 is pending before Tribunal, there was no need for freezing bank accounts - DGCEI directed to defreeze bank accounts forthwith: CESTAT (See 'Breaking News') Rajkot Central Excise arrests Director of M/s Krupalu Metals for alleged duty evasion of about Rs 2.8 Crore Obama says 'I believe America can be India's best partner' Valuation - Import of video tapes - payment to non-resident was made for rights to distribute - appellant paying ST on distribution fees under Broadcasting - Commissioner misdirected himself in including value of taxable service in value of goods imported: CESTAT (See 'Breaking News') Sudha Koka and Dr. Awdhesh Singh among Presidential Awardees for Specially Distinguished Record of Service + Good News for Babus - No Action on Anonymous Complaints - CVC (See 'DDT' Column) Whether papers suo motto called for by first appellate authority for disposing of appeal is to be construed as additional evidence under Rule 46A - NO: ITAT (See 'Breaking News') Pre-deposit Blues - Erroneous drawback is not duty? (See 'Guest Column') Goods removed from factory for export - Goods destroyed in fire as truck met with accident - No remission u/r 21 of CER can be allowed on goods destroyed after removal: CESTAT (See 'Breaking News') Banks selling gold coins, sharing ATM facilities - CCRs need Amendment (See 'Budget Run-Up') Maharashtra Govt to accord state funeral to R K Laxman Service Tax - Appeal to Tribunal - Committee of Chief Commissioners - Courts not to interfere in administrative function (See 'DDT') I-T - Whether obsolescence charges in respect of certain non-moving spare parts are allowable as deduction: HC (See '2015-TIOL-203') India-US CEO Forum: PMO to monitor big investments; Obama talks about IPR issue 'Common Man' cartoonist R K Laxman is no more; PM condoles his demise ST - Refund - Appellant paying ST on behalf of company with which it sought to merge - as Madras HC has not sanctioned scheme of merger, CNIL paid ST under VCES - Adjudicating authority to allow re-credit of Rs 79.9 cr in CENVAT account of appellant: CESTAT (See 'Breaking News') Greece rejects austerity regime; elects Syriza Party; EU fears greater uncertainty Govt gives Padma Vibhushan to L K Advani + Amitabh Bachchan + Dilip Kumar + Prakash Singh Badal; Padma Bhushan to Swapan Dasgupta + Harish Salve + Dr Ashok Seth + Bill Gates + Melinda Gates & Padma Shri to Dr Sanjay Leela Bhansali, Bibek Debroy (See 'Breaking News') TIOL wishes All Netizens Very Happy Republic Day Obama extends support to New Security Council with India as Member India, USA agree to set up hotlines between Modi & Obama and two national security advisors ACC appoints Divya Prakash Sinha as Secretary (Security) in Cabinet Secretariat + K Durga Prasad as Special DG, CRPF India, USA finally seal N-deal; agree to enhance defence cooperation Venting grievance on Facebook page of Govt departments is no offence: Apex Court India to showcase military prowess and cultural opulence for Obama (See 'Mixed Buzz') CX - Manpower services used for loading & unloading of compost & boiler ash is allowable as CENVAT credit as it is essential part of manufacture of excisable sugar - no cause for invocation of rule 6 to deny credit: CESTAT (See 'Breaking News') CBI finally nabs absconder accused of Rs 7 Crore rebate fraud case (See 'Mixed Buzz') Whether maintenance of transmission lines by one party and user of these lines by assessee for transmitting energy results into any technical service being rendered: ITAT (See '2015-TIOL-84') MGI Study turns torchlight on tax evasion & reforms in retailing (See 'Breaking News') Air Force One lands at Palam Airport; Modi breaks Protocol and goes to Airport to hug Obama; to hold 8 bilateral talks in two days Global economy may get trapped in prolonged slowdown in 2015: IMF
 
Bookmark and Share
Condonation of delay - At toss to meet end of justice!

By Neha Pandit, Advocate

'INTEREST Republicae up sit finis litum' is the basis of the provisions of limitation in any law, but to uphold the "Principles of Natural Justice" and to reach the end of justice, the clause of "CONDONATION OF DELAY" (COD) has been incorporated in it.

The Authorities of justice can condone the delay to advance substantial justice. Therefore, delay can be condoned if sufficient cause is shown for not presenting appeal in time. Though delay up to last day of filing an appeal need not be explained, but, delay thereafter has to be explained.

Power of Commissioner (Appeals) to condone delay

Delay may be due to genuine reasons. Hence, Commissioner Appeals can condone delay up to 30 days. As per the provisions of law, Commissioner of Appeals has no powers to condone delay beyond 30 days.

Whether Tribunal can go beyond the law and condone such delay and remand the matter back to the Commissioner Appeals? To meet the end of justice, whether strict adherence of law in such matters is justifiable?

Initially, in Rayman Shoe Co. V. CCE, it was held that Commissioner cannot condone delay (beyond 30 days) and Tribunal cannot order Commissioner to condone delay and hear the case on merits or condone delay itself. Tribunal can't go into the merits of the case.

Bangalore Bench, in a number of cases, specially, in Shri Vishnu Process v. CCE, Bangalore (2005-TIOL-1506-CESTAT-BANG) held that Tribunal cannot exercise any power where statute has fixed the period for COD in a case where statute has not given any power to the Authority to condone the delay beyond the statutory period on sufficient cause being shown.

Similar view has been taken in Abhishek Auto Industries v. CC, Mumbai wherein it was held that Commissioner Appeals is not competent to entertain an appeal beyond the period on 90 days in view of specific provision contained in section 128 (1) of Customs Act, 1962.

Therefore, lawfully, if the statute provides for a period of limitation and further maximum period of limitation for which delay can be condoned, the Authority cannot extend the same.

If the legislature in its wisdom has fixed a maximum period for doing a particular thing, the Authority is not competent to prescribe the period beyond it.

Conflicting Decisions

Recently, a conflicting view has been taken by the Tribunal, Chennai, while deciding Raj and Co. v. CC, Chennai (2006-TIOL-1607-CESTAT-MAD) wherein the Tribunal condoned the delay of 256 days in filing Appeal before Commissioner Appeals and directed Ld. Commissioner Appeals to dispose off the Appeal too.

"In nutshell, Tribunal surpassed the provisions of law to meet the end of justice ".

Liberal views of COD while dealing with the Govt

Another irony could be viewed in similar matters, wherein the delay of the Government is condoned, and their cases are remanded back to the Commissioner Appeals for the adjudication.

In the case of Asst. Collector of CCE, Nagapattinam v. Marimuthu, the High Court of Madras, condoned delay of 131 days for a Govt Department on the ground that records were messed up with other papers in the office and the case was remanded.

The law of limitation, no doubt, is the same for a Private Citizen as for Governmental authorities. Government, like any other litigant must take responsibility for the Acts or omission of its officers. The provisions of law applicable to the government and private person are same and hence the expression sufficient cause cannot be construed too liberally because party in default is Government.

CONCLUSION

Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of parties. They are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics, but see their remedy promptly.

"The technicalities of law cannot prevent court for doing substantial justice". Despite that, sometimes, the adoption of strict standard of proof (regarding reasons for the delay in filing appeal) tends to grave miscarriage of public justice.

Now the question, whether adherence to strict standards of law, that goes against justice should be followed?

(The author is a Bangalore-based Advocate)


 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: delay condonation by commissioner Appeals

In the case of Delta Impex 2004/173/ELT/449 The Hon'ble High Court Delhi held that when maximum time limit is specified or a condonable period is prescribed delay within the condonable period alone can be condoned.similarly in the case of M.R. Tobacco the Hon'ble High Court Delhi once agian emphasised that Commissioner Appeals cannot condone delay beyond 30 days and this view was upheld by the Apex Court in 2007/213/ELT/A115. The decision of the Chennai Bench refered in the article was not for condonation of 256 days of delay but to ascertain the correct date of receipt of the order and then the Bench observed that there was no delay if the date of receipt was taken correctly.
SDR CHENNAI

Posted by Joint Chief Departmental Representative
 
 
 
TIOL Mobile App
TIOL SEARCH
 
TIOL Subscriptions
 All-In-One Package
 Indirect Tax Package
 Income Tax Package
<< More Packages>>
 
   
             
Income Tax Customs Excise Service Tax FEMA DGFT SEZ Misc Pitara Budget
  • Notifications
  • Circulars
  • SC Cases
  • HC Cases
  • ITAT Cases
  • Instructions
  • Advance Ruling
  • Settlement
  • Other Case
  • Directorate of Income Tax (Systems)
  • Tariff Notfn
  • Non Tariff Notfn
  • Circulars
  • SC Cases
  • HC Cases
  • Cestat Cases
  • Settlement
  • Advance Ruling
  • Safeguard Duty Notfn
  • Anti-dumping Notfn
  • Drawback Cases
  • MISC Circulars
  • Tariff Notfn
  • Non Tariff Notfn
  • Circulars
  • SC Cases
  • HC Cases
  • Cestat Cases
  • Settlement
  • Advance Ruling
  • Excise Amendment
  • Clean Energy Cess Notfn
  • MISC Circulars
  • 37B Order
  • Commr.(A) Order
  • CESTAT
  • Notifications
  • Circulars
  • SC Cases
  • HC Cases
  • Cestat Cases
  • Miscellaneous
  • Advance Ruling
  • FAQ
  • Finance Act, 1994
  • Commr. (A) Orders
  • 37B Order
  • Removal of Difficulty
  • VCES
  • Accounting Head
  • Exchange Manual
  • Fema Notifications
  • SC Cases
  • HC Cases
  • RBI Notifications
  • Act
  • Rules
  • Regulations
  • Master Circulars
  • RBI Circulars
  • Depository Scheme
  • Press Note
  • Notifications
  • Circulars
  • Public Notices
  • Trade Notice
  • FTDR Amendment 2010
  • MISC
  • State Acts
  • Notifications
  • Instructions
  • Act 2005
  • Rules 2006
  • DGEP
  • State Policy
  • SC Cases
  • HC Cases
  • VAT Cases
  • Deputation Posts
  • Service News
  • The Insider
  • Transfer
  • Promotion
  • Recruitment Rules
  • Transfer Policy
  • Training Circulars
  • Service Cases
  • MISC
  • Pay Commission
  • Cadre Review
  • Budget Circular 2013-14
  • Union Budgets
  • Economic Surveys
  • Budget Speeches
  • Finance Acts
  • Finance Bill
  • TRU - D. O. Letter
  • A Taxindiaonline Website. Copyright © 2014 Taxindiaonline.com Pvt.Ltd. All rights reserved. | Powered by 4th Dimension