- (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rajesh Singh Chauhan, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. This petition assails the validity of the order dated 3-11-2014, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Lucknow whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the demand of Service Tax made under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 and the penalty imposed under Section 78 of the said Act along with certain other incidental penalties has been rejected.
(2.) From a perusal of the impugned order dated 3-11-2014, it appears that the reason given for rejection of the appeal is that the petitioner had failed to give sufficient reason for delayed filing of the statutory appeal under Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 2012. Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 2012 runs as under:- "85(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."
(3.) Thus, the aforequoted provision prescribes the limitation of two months for filing of an appeal. However, the proviso appended to Section 85(3A) of the Act empowers the Commissioner to allow presentation of an appeal within a further period of one month provided the Commissioner is satisfied that the person approaching him to file appeal was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the period of limitation.;