SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

PM-STIAC discusses accelerating Industry-Academia Partnership for Research and InnovationIndia, Singapore hold dialogue over cyber policy44 bids received under 10th Round of Commercial Coal Mine AuctionsCops arrest former Dy PM of Nepal in cooperative fraud casePuri highlights India's Petrochemical potential at India Chem 2024UN reports record high cocaine production in ColombiaMinister unveils 'Aviation Park' showcasing India's Aviation HeritageED finds PFI wanted to start Islamic movement in IndiaBlocking Credit - Rule 86ASEBI says investors can use 3-in-1 accounts to apply online for securitiesI-T- Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) need not be imposed when assessee moved an adjournment application & later complied with notice u/s 142(1): ITAT4 Kanwariyas killed as vehicle runs over them in Banka, BiharI-T- Accounting principles do not prescribe maintaining of a day-to-day stock register, and the books of accounts cannot be rejected on this basis alone: ITATUN food looted and diverted to army in EthiopiaCus - Alleged breach of conditions for operating public bonded warehouse; CESTAT rightly rejected allegations, having found no evidence of any such breach: HCUS budget deficit surges beyond USD 1.8 trillionST - Onus for proving admissibility of Cenvat Credit rests with service provider under Rule 9(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004: CESTATIf China goes into Taiwan, Trump promises to impose additional tariffsRussians love Indian films; Putin lauds BollywoodCus - Classification of goods is to be determined in accordance with Customs Tariff Act & General Interpretative Rules; Country-of-Origin Certificate may offer some guidance, but cannot solely dictate classification: CESTATCus - Benefit of such Country-of-Origin certificates cannot be denied if all relevant conditions are met under the applicable Customs Tariff rules: CESTATCuban power grid collapses; Country plunges into darknessCus - As per trite law, merely claiming a classification or exemption does not constitute mis-declaration or suppression - any misclassification does not equate to willful intent to evade duty: CESTATKarnataka mulling over 2% fee on aggregator platforms to bankroll gig worker welfare fundCus - Extended limitation cannot be invoked in case of assessee who is a regular importer with a consistent classification approach: CESTAT
 
Condonation of delay - If order is served on member of family, it is duly served - No error in order of Tribunal dismissing appeal on ground of delay: HC

By TIOL News Service

ALLAHABAD, JAN 12, 2016: AGAINST the order in original dated 19.5.2008, the appeal was filed by the appellant on 30.10.2010. Since there was a considerable delay in filing the appeal, the Tribunal by the impugned order rejected the appeal as being barred by time. The appellant, being aggrieved, has filed an appeal before the High Court contending that in the facts and circumstances the delay, if any, was liable to be condoned and that the Tribunal ought to have heard the appeal on merits.

The Department contended that the order in original was served on 18.6.2008 to one Virendra Yadav at the residential premises of the appellant who represented himself to be the nephew. The Tribunal held that there was sufficient service of the order in original and, therefore, dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation.

Accordingly to the appellant, the order in original is required to be served to the person for whom it is intended, namely, the appellant or its authorised agent. There was no proper service of the impugned order since Virendra Yadav was neither the authorised representative nor the order was served upon the appellant and, consequently, there was no proper service and they filed appeal only after a copy of the Order-in-Original was made available on 30.10.2010

After hearing both sides, the High Court held:

+ If the order is served on a member of the family, it is duly served and there is sufficient service. No assertion was made by the appellant before the Tribunal that the service made upon Virendra Yadav was not a family member or that he was not connected with the business. Even before this Court, the appellant has no where stated that Virendra Yadav is not her nephew. Making the assertion at this stage that he was not connected with the business is irrelevant. Further, nothing has been stated that the address where the service of the original order was made was incorrect.

+ The order in original was duly served upon the appellant on 18.6.2008. The appeal was filed belatedly before the Tribunal, which was rightly dismissed on the ground of limitation.

(See 2016-TIOL-67-HC-ALL-CX)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri Samrat Choudhary, Hon’ble Deputy CM & FM of State of Bihar, delivering inaugural speech at TIOL Tax Congress 2024.

TOP NEWS


AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Justice A K Patnaik, Mentor to Hon'ble Jury for TIOL Awards 2024, addressing the gathering at the event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST