9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 1268X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A. Dinesh Kumar For The Respondents : Mr. A. Tamilvanan, Government Advocate (Pondicherry) ORDER This writ petition is directed against the order dated 18. 12. 2014 passed by the appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT) Puducherry on the ground that the appellate Assistant Commissioner has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal beyond 60 days from the date from which the order copy was served. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owever, citing a reason that he has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal beyond the statutory period of 60 days, the appellate authority rejected the same and therefore, the petitioner has approached this court. Drawing attention of this court to the decision of the High Court of Allahabad dated 12. 1. 2015 in Central Excise Appeal Defective No. 155 of 2014 (M/s. Vibgyor Institute of Engineerin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of order. As per section 47(1) of the Pondicherry Value Added Tax Act, 2007, the petitioner ought to have filed the appeal within 30 days from the date of 26. 8. 2014 on which date, the petitioner was said to have been served with the impugned order. Even as per the proviso to section 47 of the Act, the appellate Assistant Commissioner can admit the appeal presented after expiration of the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent cause to condone the delay. It is also relevant to extract the relevant portion of the above decision hereunder:- "The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 30th August, 2013 and the order dated 30th September 2013. By the first order the stay application was dismissed for want of nonprosecution and, by the second order, the appeal was dismissed for not complying with the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
