2019 (8) TMI 1230

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... date of corrigendum. Once the corrigendum was issued the effective date of issue of order should be taken from the date of corrigendum, not from the initial order issued by the adjudicating authority. Therefore, on both the counts, the appeal should have been admitted and decided on merit. The he appeal was filed within 90 days i.e. normal period of 60 days plus condonable period of 30 days. M .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... alf of the appellant submits that the appeal was filed with a delay of 26 days after the normal period of 60 days. He submits that the 30 days available for the appellant for condonation. That the application for condoning the delay was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that after issue of the order a corrigendum was issued and appeal was filed within 60 days, therefore, infact .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n merit without going into the issue of delay and without getting influenced of his findings in the impugned order for the reason that he should not have considered the merit once he has dismissed the appeal on time bar. A non-maintainable appeal cannot be considered on merit. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed by way of remand to the Commissioner (Appeals). (Dictated and Pronounced .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X