9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 210X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n-Appeal i.e. 20.11.2011 - Held that: - the findings of the first appellate authority seems to be erroneous as the provision of Section 74 of the Finance Act, 1994 mandates that assessee can prefer an application for Rectification of Mistake within a period of two years from the date of issuance of impugned order - the period of limitation will start from the date when an assessee receives an orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sue lies in hand is in a narrow compass, the appeal is taken up for disposal after waiving the condition of pre deposit of the amount involved. 4. On perusal of records, it transpires that appellant herein is saddled with demand of ₹ 2,79,280/- with interest and also penalties vide Order-in-Original No. 43/2011-Hyd.-III-Adjn (ST), dt. 20.11.2011. Aggrieved by such an order, appellant p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 24.01.2013, filed an appeal before first appellate authority on 25.02.2013. 6. The first appellate authority rejected/dismissed the appeal holding that appeal was filed beyond period of limitation i.e. sixty days and further 30 days from the date of issue of Order-in-Appeal i.e. 20.11.2011. In my considered view, the findings of the first appellate authority seems to be erroneous as the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
