9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 666X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the notice is shown to have been received by Manoj Srivastava whereas the owner of appellant is Mr. Aslam has no further relevance to extend any benefit to the appellant. Condonation of delay in filing appeal - HELD THAT:- Keeping in view that there is a statutory mandate upon Commissioner (Appeals) to not to hear the appeal, which is filed beyond the period of 60 days extendable to another 30 days if sufficient cause for delay is shown. There are no infirmity in the order when the impugned delay of one month and 20 days is denied to be condoned for no sufficient cause - reliance correctly placed in the case of SINGH ENTERPRISES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAMSHEDPUR [ 2007 (12) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT] . Appeal dismissed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not provided within reasonable time and subsequently, vide letter dated 2nd July, 2018 the request was rejected, however, the appellant filed the impugned appeal on 30th July, 2018. 3.2 Though there is a delay in filing the said appeal of one month 20 days but absolutely due to the time taken in filing the said RTI application and for the reasons as mentioned above it is submitted that learned Commissioner (Appeals) failed to appreciate the same as sufficient reason for the impugned delay. Accordingly, the order of Commissioner is hereby prayed to be set aside and appeal is prayed to be allowed. 4. While rebutting these arguments, learned D.R. has submitted that appellant had knowledge of all the proceedings. He had submitted his ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant. Para 11 as impressed upon by the D.R. reads as follows:- 11. The claimant has been afforded a personal hearing in a matter on 13.10.2017 with a request to produce the evidences in its support of its defence. However, the claimant neither appeared for the hearing on the scheduled date nor sought for any other date for said hearing. The claimant has been extended another opportunity for a personal hearing in a matter on 21.11.2017. However, the claimant failed to avail the opportunity. The Claimant has again been afforded third opportunity for a personal hearing in a matter on 28.12.2017 / 29.12.2017 and the letter to this effect has been served upon it on 26.12.2017 through the office of the Superintendent, Central Tax, Range: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this context, I rely upon the case law in the case of Singh Enterprises vs. CCE, Jamshedpur reported in 2008 (221) E.L.T. 163 (S.C.). It is mentioned therein as follows:- 8 . The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) as also the Tribunal being creatures of Statute are vested with jurisdiction to condone the delay beyond the permissible period provided under the Statute. The period upto which the prayer for condonation can be accepted is statutorily provided. It was submitted that the logic of Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963 (in short the Limitation Act ) can be availed for condonation of delay. The first proviso to Section 35 makes the position clear that the appeal has to be preferred within three months from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
