2002 (3) TMI 638

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. Shri Joy Kumar, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This is a Revenue appeal against the order dated 3-5-99 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Chandigarh. The appeal is filed after a delay of 893 days and the Revenue have also filed COD petition. I have heard Shri B.C. Mahey, ld. JDR for the Revenue and Shri Joy Kumar, ld. Advocate for the respondents. In the COD petition filed by t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mmissioner (Appeals) was accepted by the department on 4-8-1999 but subsequently this appeal is filed at the direction of the Chief Commissioner. I am of the view that this could not be considered to be the sufficient cause to admit an appeal on condonation of delay of 893 days involved in the present case. The ratio of the cited decision of the Supreme Court is also not applicable to the facts of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X