Page 149 - GSTL_11th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 2

2020 ] KAUSHAL CONSTRUCTIONS v. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & S.T., PANCHKULA 235
2020 (37) G.S.T.L. 235 (Tri. - Chan.)

IN THE CESTAT, REGIONAL BENCH, CHANDIGARH
[COURT NO. I]
S/Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (J) and Raju, Member (T)
KAUSHAL CONSTRUCTIONS
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & S.T., PANCHKULA
Final Order No. A/60884/2019-CU(DB), dated 21-10-2019 in Application
No. ST/Misc./COD/60105/2019 in Appeal No. ST/60189/2019-DB
Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Limitation - Delay in filing appeal
claimed to be on account of non-receipt of impugned order and when same
received after several letters to Department, appeal thereagainst filed before
Tribunal - Such a contention not acceptable when acknowledgement of receipt
of such letters from Department not produced - Since Department’s record in-
dicating that impugned order sent by Speed Post which was not returned back,
delay in filing appeal not condonable - Section 86 of Finance Act, 1994. [para 2]
Appeal dismissed
REPRESENTED BY : None, for the Appellant.
Shri A.K. Saini, Authorised Representative, for the
Respondent.
[Order per : Ashok Jindal, Member (J)]. - None appeared on behalf of
the appellant nor any request for adjournment have been received. On perusal of
the record, we find that the matter has come on several occasions that is 5-4-2019,
20-4-2019, 2-9-2019 and on all the occasions none appeared on behalf of the ap-
pellant nor any request for adjournment have been received.
2. The grievance of the appellant by way of this appeal is that the delay
caused on the ground that they have not received the order impugned and as
they received the impugned order, they filed the appeal but report was sought
from the Ld. AR who produced the records and as per the records the impugned
order was sent to the appellant by way of speed post on 26-7-2016 and the same
has not been returned back to the Department but there is no contradiction to
that stand of the Revenue by the appellant, moreover, as per the application, it is
contended by the appellant that they had written the several letters to the De-
partment for supply of the order but none of the letters are having any receipt
from the Department which shows that the appellant has never approached to
the Department for supply of the copy of the order. In that circumstances, we do
not find any merits in the application for condonation of delay, therefore, the
application for condonation of delay is dismissed, consequently, the appeal is
also dismissed.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)

_______

GST LAW TIMES  11th June 2020  149