9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (1) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. 2.. Today the aforesaid stay applications were listed for hearing. The appeals were not listed for hearing. After hearing both sides, we decided with the consent of both the sides to take up the appeals themselves for disposal. 3. Shri S. J. Vyas, Chartered Accountant of the appellants firm, contended that when they filed the RT-12 returns for months of Oct. 86 and Dec. 86, the Supdt. of the Range made an endorsement or the assessment memorandum directing them to pay an amount of Rs. 83,910.00 in respect of RT-12 of Oct. 86 and Rs. 16,152.38 in respect of RT-12 for Dec. 86. The said endorsement was cryptic and without mentioning any grounds for making the debit. Shri Vyas also mentioned that no show cause notice was issued and thei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. Shri Mondal contended that in this case no demand notice has been issued and hence there is no need to consider the stay applications. When he was specifically asked as to whether the department agrees that there is no enforceable demand against the appellants on this ground. Shri Mondal conceded that the amounts have been quantified in the assessment memorandum. Shri Mondal stated that the assessment orders even according to appellants were received on 9-7-1987 and they have posted the appeals on 9-10-1987, the last date for filing the appeals. They have not taken due diligence and proper care to ensure that the appeals are filed in time. 5. After hearing both the sides and after perusal of the available records, we find that the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... beyond three months but within six months, if proper reasons are given for the delay in filing the appeal. Hence it is obligatory on the part of the Collector (Appeals) to ascertain the reasons before exercising his discretion to reject the appeal as time-barred. This is not a case where the appeals have been received beyond the statutory period of six months, where he has no powers to condone the delay. Even in the letter addressed by the office of the Collector (Appeals) no mention is made about the delayed receipt of the appeals for considering it as a notice calling for the explanation for the delay. 7. In view of this, the impugned orders passed by the Collector (Appeals) are bad in law, which are required to be set aside. According ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
