2009 (2) TMI 69 - HC - Central Excise

Commissioner s powers to condone the delay - appeal against O-I-O was filed beyond a period of ten months from the last date of statutorily prescribed limitation period - Commissioner dismissed the same as being barred by limitation - CESTAT while passing the impugned order has stated that Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in holding that he did not have powers to condone the delay beyond the period of thirty days - impugned order does not merit interference

Summary

The Gujarat High Court, in the citation 2009 (2) TMI 69, heard a petition challenging an order made by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) confirming an order made by the Commissioner (Appeals). The petitioner argued for a fresh hearing before the first appellate authority, citing the attachment of premises and machinery as securing the interest of Revenue. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation due to a delay in filing beyond the prescribed period. CESTAT upheld this decision, stating that the Commissioner (Appeals) had no power to condone the delay beyond thirty days. The High Court ruled that without statutory discretion to condone delays, the dismissal of the appeal was justified. Therefore, the impugned order was upheld, and the petition was rejected.