2006 (1) TMI 544

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ent. [Order]. - Heard both sides. 2. The assessee is in appeal aggrieved by impugned order passed by Commissioner (A), Mumbai-III. The Commissioner (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of limitation. The Order-in-Original was passed on 24-11-1997 and date of issue is shown as 8-1-98. 3. The assessee has paid the confirmed duty amount of Rs. 22,337.60 (Rupees Twenty Tw .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... asing on the said report, the Commissioner (A) dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee as time-barred. As seen from the impugned order of the Commissioner (A), there is no categorical finding as to when the appellants received the copy of the order. Thus the findings appears to be erroneous. The appellant submit that he had no knowledge of passing of the order until the letter written by Range .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... knowledge. The mater is being remitted back to the Commissioner (A), who shall dispose of the same on merits in respect of penalty imposed. This remand order makes it clear that the appeal before the Commissioner (A) filed by the appellants was within the time and even if any delay, the same is condoned. In the result, the appeal is allowed in remand for fresh adjudication on merits confirming to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X