9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 263X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ors. [2008 (7) TMI 836 - SUPREME COURT], we deem it fit that the appellant has to be shown some leniency in the present case for the purpose of condoning the delay before Commissioner (Appeals). The circumstances explained by the appellant cannot be held leading to any conscious delay or dilatory tactics on their behalf. As such we are of the view that Commissioner (Appeals) should have condoned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed with the delay of 69 days. The appellant filed COD application before Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that their excise person left the job on 24-2-2007 and such the appeal could not be prepared well within the time and could not be filed before the last date of expiry, i.e., 21-4-2011. The Commissioner (Appeals) has not accepted the above reason for late filing of appeal and rejected the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . In paragraph 13 of the judgment, the Hon ble Court has as under :- 13. (i) The words sufficient cause for not making the application within the period of limitation should be understood and applied in reasonable, pragmatic, practical and liberal manner, depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case, and the type of case. The words sufficient cause in section 5 of the Limitation A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al on the ground of abatement. (iii) The decisive factor in condonation of delay, is not the length of delay but sufficient of a satisfactory explanation. 5. By adopting the above guidelines laid down by Hon ble Supreme Court, we deem it fit that the appellant has to be shown some leniency in the present case for the purpose of condoning the delay before Commissioner (Appeals). The circumstan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
