9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 975X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sh, Superintendent (AR) - For the Respondent ORDER Per : S.S. Garg The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dt. 28/10/2016 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) whereby the Commissioner(Appeals) has rejected the appeal at the threshold for failure to comply with the provisions of Section 35F. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e order-in-original, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (AppeaIs) on the ground that the appellant had carried out the activity of sugar bag filling, handling, loading, unloading, printing etc. involved both different items of work at separate rates prescribed in contract and executed the work in lump sum and not on per labour basis and further the service is on contact for Supply ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeals) has observed that in the present case, there was a delay of 26 days but the appellant has not filed any application seeking condonation of delay by showing sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time. Thereafter the Commissioner (Appeals) has proceeded to dismiss the appeal on account of failure to comply with the provisions of Section 35F for not depositin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als). He further submitted that for condoning the delay before the Commissioner (Appeals), COD application is not required to be filed before this Tribunal. He also submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not dismissed the appeal of the appellant only on the ground of delay in filing the appeal rather the Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal on threshold for not making mandatory p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... done. 5. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the COD application which has been filed by the appellant is not maintainable before this Tribunal as the delay of 26 days have been caused before the Commissioner(Appeals) and not before this Tribunal. Therefore, we dismiss the COD application. Further we find that there is inordinate delay of around 9 months in fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
