Goods & Services Tax
GST Case Laws

Search GST Case Laws

Keyword

Authority

Court

Section

Appeal No.

Date of Order

Date of Order

Judge

Favouring

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

{field 13} {field 14}

Ld. Counsel Ms. Mary Josy appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that  the appellant is a municipality, a State Governmental Authority inter alia, engaged  in providing services covered under the categories of “Renting of Immovable  Property Service” and “Sale of Space or Time for Advertisement Service”. She submits that the impugned order dt. 26.02.2016 was served on the appellant on  04.03.2016. The appeal is ought to have been filed before the Tribunal on or before  04.06.2016, however the appeal was filed on 02.07.2018. She submits that major  portion of the demand to the tune of Rs.1,14,66,895/- for the period 2010-11 to 2013-14 has been dropped by the Commissioner in the impugned order against which Department has also preferred Appeal ST/41354/2016, which is pending  before Tribunal. She submits that the present appeal has been filed against  confirmation of balance demand to the tune of Rs.75,70,794/- for the very same  period; that the appellant did not collect service tax on any receipt during the  period of dispute.; that appellant is in severe financial crisis for the last few years  and has not been able to mobilize funds to pay the predeposit; that they defaulted  payment of electricity charges to TNEB; that even salary could not be paid to their  employees for the last three months. Apart from the financial crisis, there has  been frequent change of competent authority in the Municipality for the last two  years which also attributed administrative delay in filing the appeal. The delay is  neither wanton nor intentional but due to administrative exigencies as well as  severe financial crisis. She therefore prayed that considering the plea of appellant,  delay may be condoned as they have good case on merits to succeed.