9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 1446 - AT - CustomsCondonation of delay of 11 days in filing the appeal - Held that - The Order-in-Original dated 12.06.2017 was received by the assessee on 15.06.2017 and accordingly, they were required to file the appeal before the lower appellate authority on or before 16.08.2017. However, the appeal was filed only on 08.09.2017 i.e. after a delay of 23 days - though the appeal has been filed beyond the statutory period of 60 days but the same has been filed within the condonable period of thirty days. The delay in filing the appeal before the lower appellate authroity is condoned. It would be appropriate to remit the matter back to the ld.Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal on merit.
Issues Involved:
Delay in filing the appeal before the Forum; Appeal rejected on the ground of time bar; Condonation of delay; Appeal filed beyond statutory period; Appeal filed within the condonable period; Remitting the matter back to Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding on merit. Analysis: The judgment deals with a Miscellaneous Application filed by the appellant to condone the delay of 11 days in filing the appeal before the Forum. The delay is condoned based on the reasons explained by the appellant's counsel and the submissions mentioned in the application. The Misc. Application (COD) is allowed, and with the consent of the Revenue, the appeal itself is taken up for final disposal since the issue involved is narrow. The Commissioner (Appeals) had not decided the appeal on merit but rejected it on the ground of time bar. The Order-in-Original was received by the assessee on a specific date, and the appeal was filed after a delay of 23 days beyond the statutory period of 60 days. However, it was filed within the condonable period of thirty days. Consequently, the delay in filing the appeal before the lower appellate authority is condoned, and the matter is remitted back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal on merit. It is emphasized that a reasonable opportunity of hearing should be granted to the appellant to present their case, and both sides are allowed to produce evidence in support of their arguments. The judgment concludes by stating that the decision was dictated and pronounced in the open court.
|
