9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 810X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ys for condonation of delay of 120 days said to be involved in the filing of their appeal. The appellant has since filed an affidavit stating that the extent of delay of the appeal is 145 days and not 120 days. Both in the application and the present affidavit, the appellant submits that the delay of the appeal was occasioned by non-co-operation of the CHA. It is submitted that the necessary docum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmitted that the appellant, if aggrieved by the same order, could have filed cross objections in the department s appeal. It is also submitted that the appellant could pot have complained against their CHA, which they did not do. 3. We are not impressed with the prayer for condonation of the above delay involved in the filing of the appeal. According to the appellant, they received a copy of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... indicates that none of the above documents was available with SIIB and, therefore, the party was advised to check with their CHA. However, it appears, the party did not take steps to obtain copies of the necessary documents from their CHA. It appears, the present appeal was filed on 14-10-2009 soon after receipt of SIIB s letter ibid. It is also evident that the department filed appeal No. C/414/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal in the first fortnight of July 2009, they could have filed cross objections against, the Commissioner s order within the said period of 45 days, but this was also not done. In this connection, it is pertinent to note that a clear indication of the relevant provision of law was also given in the aforesaid notice dated 1-7-2009. On the whole, the party has not pursued appellate remedy diligentl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
