9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 516X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is an application for condonation of delay of 170 days. 2. The contention of the applicant/appellant is that the impugned order-in-appeal was passed by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) on 25.03.2010, but the same was not dispatched to the applicant/appellant. On the earlier occasion i.e. on 07.09.2012, the ld. A.R. for the Department, was directed to verify from the respective office of the ld. Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. However, on being advised by their Counsel, they have filed an appeal before this Tribunal. 4. The ld. A.R. could not produce anything contrary to the submissions made by the ld. Advocate for the appellant/applicant. 5. I find that the reasons explained by the applicant in the miscellaneous application seeking condonation of delay is sufficient warranting condonation. Accordingly, the Miscell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has also not decided the case on merit. In these circumstances, ld. Commissioner (Appeals) order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) to re-consider the application of condonation of 32 days delay before him, after taking into consideration the affidavit and medical certificate annexed to the COD application. Needless to mentio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
