9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (10) TMI 111 - AT - CustomsCondonation of delay of 95 days - Held that - the Commissioner (Appeals), does not have power to condone the delay beyond 90 days i.e. the statutory limit of 60 days and condonable limit of 30 days. The decision in the case of Singh Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur 2007 (12) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA apply - appeal rejected - decided in favor of Revenue.
Issues: Appeal against assessment order, delay in filing appeal, statutory time limits for condonation of delay
In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD, the issue revolved around an appeal filed against an assessment order with a delay of 95 days. The appellant had deposited the duty but the appeal was dismissed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) on the grounds that the delay could not be condoned beyond the statutory limit of 60 days, with a condonable limit of 30 days. The Ld. AR for Revenue cited the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sing Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur to support the rejection of the appeal. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue's argument and rejected the appeal. The key contention in this case was whether the delay in filing the appeal beyond the statutory limit could be condoned. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had dismissed the appeal, stating that the delay of 95 days could not be condoned as it exceeded the statutory limit of 60 days with a condonable limit of 30 days. The Ld. AR for Revenue supported this decision by referring to a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which affirmed the strict adherence to statutory time limits for filing appeals. The Tribunal concurred with the Revenue's argument and upheld the dismissal of the appeal. The crux of the matter was the interpretation of statutory time limits for condonation of delay in filing appeals. The appellant had filed the appeal 95 days after the assessment order, leading to its dismissal by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) on the basis that the delay exceeded the permissible limits. The Ld. AR for Revenue relied on a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to argue that such delays could not be condoned beyond the specified statutory limits. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the appeal, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the prescribed time limits for filing appeals in such cases.
|
