Goods & Services Tax
GST Case Laws

Search GST Case Laws





Appeal No.

Date of Order

Date of Order



Login/Subscribe to get access. Plan starts from Rs. 3500/-  Subscribe Now

{field 13} {field 14}

Ld. Counsel submits that appellant’s headquarters is in Mumbai and the relevant personnel in charge of taxation is also based in Mumbai. While the notices and correspondences thereto were served on the appellant in Chennai, the same were in turn forwarded to their personnel in charge of service tax matters in Mumbai office. However, on 14.02.2018, Shri Deepak Gogavkar, the Asst. Vice President (Tax) of appellant company who was handling activities of Chennai region, resigned and left the organization. However, inadvertently, at the time of relieving of Mr. Deepak Gogavkar the fact of the present appeal pending for filing before CESTAT was not noticed, which could be discovered only at their annual fiscal audit. Thus there was inadvertent and unintended delay of 60 days in filing of the subject appeal. Ld. counsel submits they have also filed Appeal ST/40923/2017-DB on the similar issue for the earlier period. Therefore, the appellant undoubtedly had intended and at all times to prefer an appeal against the impugned order. The appellant has paid Rs.15 crores which is in much excess of pre-deposit of 7.5% at the time of investigation, hence there has been no monetary benefit to the appellant due to this delay. As the amount involved is substantial, if the delay is not condoned it will result in a grave and immeasurable financial loss. She prays for condonation of delay. She relies on following case laws : 1) Athletics Federation of India Vs CC (ACC & Import) Mumbai 2010 (254) ELT 310 (Tri.-Mumbai) 2) Ram Nath Sao Vs Gobardhan Sao 2002 (3) SCC 195 3) Sri Vasavi Agencies Vs CCE Vishakapatnam 2008 (227) ELT 185 (A.P.)