The High Court dismissed the appeal because the appellant failed to enclose the original application for condonation of delay filed before the Tribunal on records, deeming them not serious in pursuing the matter.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE : 17.07.2014
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.M.AKBAR ALI
C.M.A. NO.1606 OF 2014
AND
M.P. NO. 1 OF 2014
M/s.North Star Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd.
No.18 (Old No.8, 9/1)
Jaffer Sarang Street, Chennai 600 001. .. Appellant
- Vs -
1. The Commissioner of Service Tax
Newry Towers, No.2054, 4 th Floor
II Avenue, 12 th Main Road
Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040.
2. The Customs, Excise & Service Tax
Appellate Tribunal
South Zonal Bench, 1 st Floor
No.26, Haddows Road, Chennai 600 006. .. Respondents
Appeal filed against the order dated 1.8.13 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Shastri Bhavan, Chennai – 6 in Final Order No.40434 of 2013.
For Appellant : Mr. V.S.Manoj
JUDGMENT
(DELIVERED BY R.SUDHAKAR, J.)
This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the Final order No.40434/13, passed by the 2nd respondent dated 1.8.13, wherein the following substantial questions of law have been raised :-
i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in dismissing the condonation of delay petition.
ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the cdase, the Tribunal erred in not relying upon the
decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Katiji & Ors. (AIR 1987 SC 1353), wherein it has been clearly held that a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late and that refusing to condone the delay can result in meritorious matters being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice is being defeated.
iii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in dismissing the petition on the ground that there is gross negligence and inaction on the part of the applicant without appreciating the circumstances which led to the delay in filing the appeal.
iv) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in ignoring the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Areva T and D India Ltd. - Vs – Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (2006 (287) ITR 555), wherein it has been held that the Court should adopt a pragmatic approach and exercise their discretion on the facts of each case keeping in mind that in construing the expression sufficient course the principle of advancing substantial justice if of prime importance and expression sufficient cause should receive a liberal construction.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
GLN
To
1. The Commissioner of Service Tax
Newry Towers, No.2054, 4 th Floor
II Avenue, 12 th Main Road
Anna Nagar, Chennai 600 040.
2. The Customs, Excise & Service Tax
Appellate Tribunal
South Zonal Bench, 1 st Floor
No.26, Haddows Road
Chennai 600 006.
1 cc to K.Vaitheeswaran ,Advocate, SR.No.37635
C.M.A. NO. 1606 OF 2014
tej(co)
pmk.24.7.2014
M/s. North Star Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd.
The Commissioner of Service Tax
The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench
R. SUDHAKAR
G.M.AKBAR ALI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
