9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 669X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the matter. He submitted that against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) appellant had approached the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court and vide judgment dt. 03.12.2014, the Hon'ble High Court had disposed the writ petition granting opportunity to the petitioner to file an appeal before the CESTAT against the impugned order and the CESTAT shall consider the question of limitation with regard to filing of such appeal. He argued that there was a direction by the High Court to the Tribunal to consider the appeal on merits. Therefore appellant had filed the present appeal before the Tribunal along with application for condonation of delay. The delay was condoned by the Tribunal excluding the time taken by the appellant to pursue the matter by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers to condone the delay beyond the period prescribed in the Section which would be at most 90 days. 4. Heard both sides. On perusal of the impugned order, we find that Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal on the ground of being time-barred. Ld. counsel for appellant has submitted that Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court vide its order dt. 03.12.2014 has directed the Tribunal to decide the case on merits and not on the ground of time-bar. We reproduce the relevant para of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court as under : "3. Admittedly as against the impugned order, the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy of filing an appeal before the CESTAT. However, without exhausting such remedy, the petitioner has straight away app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any direction to dispose the appeal on the merits of the case. When the commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal on the ground of being time-barred, this Tribunal cannot go into the merits of the matter. We do not find any flaw in the rejection of the appeal by Commissioner (Appeals). On reading of the judgement dt. 03.12.2014 of the Hon'ble High Court, it is very much clear that there is no direction to decide the appeal on merit and there is no room for any confusion. The case laws cited by Ld. counsel for appellant as to the issue of demand of duty on Aluminium Dross cannot be considered for the reason that the appeal filed before Commissioner (Appeals) is time barred. 5. Following the decision of the Apex Court in Singh Enterpris ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
