9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 383X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch was due to non-receipt of the Order-in-Original sent by the department on 5-4-2011. They came to know of the passing of the order only in July 2011 when the recovery proceedings were initiated by the jurisdictional range officer. Immediately, thereafter they obtained a certified copy of the order and filed the appeal. In these circumstances, the delay ought to have been condoned by the appellat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -in-Original No. 28/SPM/ADC/ ST/2011, dated 29-3-2011 along with interest and also imposing penalties. Against the said order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the lower appellate authority on 17-8-2011 after a delay of 50 days from the statutory time limit of three months from filing of the appeal. The appellant submitted before the appellate authority that they received a copy of the adj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , they became aware of the order and they obtained a certified copy and filed the appeal which led to the delay. The lower appellate authority ought to have condoned the delay. In these circumstances as it was within the condonable period. He also relies on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Sunrise Industrial Corporation v. CC, Amritsar - 2012 (280) E.L.T. 148 = 2013 (29) S.T.R. 447, Ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... From the record it is seen that the appeal has been filed within the condonable period of three months after the expiry of statutory time limit of three months for filing the appeal. The appellant has explained the reason for the delay which was due to non-receipt of the Order-in-Original sent by the department on 5-4-2011. They came to know of the passing of the order only in July 2011 when the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
