Raipur Treasure Island Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner (Appeals) (CESTAT Delhi)
Appeal Dismissed as Time-Barred Restored: Rectification Application Stops Limitation Clock, Rules CESTAT Delhi; Limitation Recomputed After Rectification Plea: CESTAT Delhi Remands Appeal for Fresh Decision; CESTAT Delhi: Appeal Filed After Rectification Order Not Delayed—Matter Remanded for Merits Review; Delay in Appeal Justified by Pending Rectification: CESTAT Orders Remand to Commissioner (Appeals); Rectification Petition Saves Appeal from Being Time-Barred, Rules CESTAT Delhi.
The appellant is undertaking construction of a mall. Input credit was sought to be disallowed. A demand came to be confirmed under section 73 of the Finance Act. The appellant filed an application seeking rectification of mistake under section 74 of the Act. The said rectification was rejected. The appellant filed appeal before appellate authority. The appellate authority held that the appeal is time barred under section 85 of the Finance Act and it has no power to condone delay beyond one month. Hence, appeal before Tribunal.
Hon’ble CESTAT, Delhi set aside the order and allowed the appeal. It held that the period of limitation would start from the date of passing of the rectification order. Hence; from the date of the rectification order; the appeal was in time. Accordingly; remands the matter back to the Appellate authority to decide the appeal on merits.
