9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 823X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... harihoke (Oral): This appeal is directed against the order in appeal dated 26.3.2012 whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal filed by appellant assessee against the order in original confirming excise duty of Rs.21,27,955/- along with interest and also imposing equal amount of penalty. The Appeal was dismissed without going into the merits of the case purely on technical ground th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, could not file the appeal within the requisite period because the proprietor of the appellant firm was indisposed. Moreover, the counsel for the appellant because of unfortunate demise of his relative could not prepare and file the appeal at the earliest. Ld. Counsel submits that Commissioner (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that the appellant was prevented from filing appeal within stipulate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant as time barred because the appellant failed to produce any evidence to substantiate his plea that he was prevented from filing appeal within time due to illness. 5. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 deals with the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appeal in time because of unfortunate demise of his relative. The explanation given by the appellant appears to be reasonable. Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected this explanation taking a hyper technical view that appellant has failed to produce a medical certificate or prescription issued by a Doctor to show that appellant was actually indisposed at the relevant time. This approach in our view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
