9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Appellant Mr. K. Murali, Superintendent (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG In the present appeal, the Registry has raised the defect that appellant had not produced the copy of show-cause notice and the Order-in-Original. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the case can be disposed of without show-cause notice and Order-in-Original as the issue lies in a narrow compass. With the consent of both the parties, I proceed to decide the case as the issue involved is in narrow compass. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are engaged in providing erection, commissioning or installation service to M/s. Macronet Pvt. Ltd. for providing DTH service. They have r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... days. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant has filed the present appeal. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though there was a delay of 41 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (A) and as per Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994, the Commissioner can condone the delay of one month if sufficient cause is shown. She further submitted that there was no mala fide on the part of the appellant to file the appeal with a delay of 41 days. She further submitted that delay should be condoned under Section 5 read with Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act. In support of her submission, she relied upon the decision rendered in the case of Jai Hind Bottling Compan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clearly shows that the appeal has to be filed within 60 days but in terms of the proviso further 30 days time can be granted by the appellate authority to entertain the appeal. The proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 35 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. The language used makes the position clear that the legislature intended the appellate authority to entertain the appeal by condoning delay only upto 30 days after the expiry of 60 days which is the normal period for preferring appeal. Therefore, there is complete exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The Commissioner and the High Court were therefore justified in holding that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
