2011 (9) TMI 167

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d both sides.   2. The appellant filed this application for stay of operation of the impugned order. The duty as per the assessment order has already been paid, therefore the application for stay of operation of the impugned order is dismissed as infructuous.   3. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal as time-barred without going into the merits. The Commissioner .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sment. It is further submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not put to notice the appellant regarding the time-bar of the appeal. The appellant relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Lovely Industrial Enterprises vs. CC, New Delhi reported in 2006 (205) ELT 557, whereby in a similar situation, the delay is condoned by the Tribunal.   5. The learned SDR appearing on be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X