9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1027X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... F INDIA], where it was held that the proviso to sub-section(1) of Section 35 ibid makes the position crystal clear that the appellate authority has no power to allow the appeal to be presented beyond the period of 30 days. Refund rightly rejected - Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - ST/20915/2016-SM, ST/20916/2016-SM, ST/20917/2016-SM - Final Order No. 20029-20031 / 2017 - Dated:- 9-1-2017 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member Mr. K. S. Ramu, Advocate For the appellant Mrs. Ezhilmathi, AR For the respondent ORDER Per S. S. Garg The appellant has filed three appeals against the common impugned order dated 4.4.2016 whereby the learned Commissioner (A) has dismissed the appeals of the appellant at the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed almost after 140 days from the date of receipt of the Order-in-Original. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants have filed these three appeals before this Tribunal. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the dismissal of the appeals at the threshold by the Commissioner (A) without going into the merits of the case is not sustainable in law. He further submitted that the delay was caused on account of fault of the consultant who did not file the appeals in time. He further submitted that the learned Commissioner (A) should have liberally exercised his discretion to condone the delay in filing the appeals and should have decided the matter on merit. 5. On the oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iii. Singh Enterprises vs. CCE, Jamshedpur reported in 2008 (221) ELT 163 (SC) 6. Whereas on the other hand the learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the decision rendered in the case of CCE, Gurgaon vs. M/s. KAP Cones in Civil Appeal No.5432 of 2015, which according to me is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that there is no infirmity in the impugned order because as per Section 85(3A), the appeal before the Commissioner (A) has to be filed within 60 days from the date of communication of the order and in this case admittedly order was received on 20.10.2015. Here it is relevant to reproduce Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
