9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (9) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ED BY : None, for the Appellant. Shri V. Valte, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)]. - The above two appeals are directed against an order rejecting the appeals by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground of limitation. 2. The appellant does not dispute that the appeals were filed after a gap of 3 years and 4 months from the date of the order. Their submission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R. 4. It is the submission of the learned SDR that it is well settled that statutory authorities like Commissioner (Appeals) cannot entertain an appeal filed beyond the permitted period under the Statute. Abhishek Auto Industries v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai (Import) [2003 (160) E.L.T. 695 (Tribunal) = 2003 (56) RLT 405 (CEGAT - Del.)]. The period for condonation of delay is also stipu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the service was effected by a mode recognised in law i.e. affixing on the factory gate. The appellants' complaint cannot also be accepted for another reason. During the relevant period since the management of the company was with SIDBI, there was no requirement to serve the notice on the present appellant. The appeals filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) were, therefore, clearly beyond the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
