9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 1305X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... various cases - reliance placed in the case of M/S. FALCON TYPES LTD. VERSUS THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (SEAPORT-IMPORT) [ 2016 (7) TMI 40 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] ] where it was held that the appellate authority, has no powers to condone the delay, beyond the extendable period. Thus the appellate authority has no power to condone the delay, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ducherry, refusing to condone the delay, on the ground that he has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal, beyond 60 days. 2. The respondent is running the business of resale of live chicken, which is taxable at 5%, under Entry No. 81A of Part A of Third Schedule, appended under Section 14 of the Pondicherry VAT Act, with effect from 01. 01. 2012. On the same line, assessment orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court, vide order, dated 23. 04. 2015, following 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 Engineering and Tech. v. The Commissioner of Central Excise and Service), condoned the delay, by setting aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and remitted the matter back to the appellate au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. 2016], a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, following the decisions in Indian Coffee Worker's Co-op. Society Ltd. , v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes reported in 2002 (I) CTC 406, Singh Enterprises v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur reported in 2008 (221) E. L. T. 163 (SC), Commissioner of Customs Central Excise v. Hongo India (P) Ltd. , reported in 2009 (236) ELT 417 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
