An appellate authority under the Finance Act, 1994, has no jurisdiction to condone delays in filing an appeal beyond the statutory time limit provided under Section 85(3A), and strict adherence to limitation periods is mandated by law.

SANJIV SRIVASTAVA:

This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No.MRT/EXCUS/000/APPL-MRT/215/2023-24 dated 28/02/2024 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Central Goods & Services Tax, Meerut. By the impugned order following has been held:-

“ORDER

In view of the above discussion & findings, without going into merits of the case, I hereby dismiss the present appeal No. 76-ST/AAPL-MRT/GZB/2023-24 dated 06.07.2023 filed by M/s Accurate Advertising Agency, 14A/7, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad-201012 (U.P.) against the Order-in-Original No. 10/DC/TDP/S.Tax/D-1/GZB/2022-23 dated 31.01.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Central GST Division-1, Ghaziabad, due to the failure of the appellant to comply with the provision of Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994.”

2.1 I have heard Shri Pranjal Shukla, learned Counsel for the appellant and Shri Abhishek Banarjee, Authorized Representative appearing for the revenue.

3.1 I have considered the impugned order along with the submissions made in appeal and during the course of arguments.

3.2 I find that the appellant had filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeal) against Order-in-Original dated 31.01.2023 on 06.07.2023.

3.3 In the appeal memo filed by the appellant before Commissioner (Appeals) at S. No.4 appellant has very categorically mentioned as follows:

Appellant has not disputed this fact, even before me. Thus, going by the appellant’s own averment with respect to the date of communication, the appeal before Commissioner (Appeal) could have been filed by 13.05.2023 (within normal period of limitation) and by 13.06.2023 along with the application for condonation of delay. Appellant contended that they had filed the before the Commissioner (Appeal) on 06.07.2023, with a delay of 54 days.

3.4 I find that the issue involved in the present appeal is with respect of condonation of delay in filing the appeal by the Commissioner (Appeal). In the present case the appeal has been filed as observed by the Commissioner (Appeal) after more than the condonable period after the receipt of the order of Original Authority. Section 85 (3A) of the Finance Act, 1994 provides as follows:

“SECTION 85. Appeals to the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals).—

(3A) An appeal shall be presented within two months from the date of receipt of the decision or order of such adjudicating authority, made on and after the Finance Bill, 2012 receives the assent of the President, relating to service tax, interest or penalty under this Chapter : Provided that the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of two months, allow it to be presented within a further period of one month.”

In terms of the above, it is observed that the appeal was to be filed before the Commissioner (Appeal) within two months of the date of the receipt of the Order-in-Original by the appellant. As per the proviso Commissioner (Appeal) has been granted the power to condone delay of one month in filing the appeal on sufficient cause being shown. In the present case appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeal) after the condonable period from the date of receipt of Order-in-Original. Hence, Commissioner (Appeal) has rightly held that appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation and has dismissed the same on this ground alone.

3.5 This issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Singh Enterprises [2008 (221) E.L.T. 163 (SC)], wherein it has been held that Commissioner (Appeals) could not condone the delay beyond the 30 days in filing the appeal before him, relevant part of the said decision are reproduced bellow for ready reference:-

“6. At this juncture, it is relevant to take note of Section 35 of the Act which reads as follows :

“35. Appeals to Commissioner (Appeals).