2009 (2) TMI 69

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s) was justified in holding that he did not have powers to condone the delay beyond the period of thirty days - impugned order does not merit interference - 27261 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 6-2-2009 - D. A. MEHTA and S. R. BRAHMBHATT, JJ. Mr. Ramnandan Singh for the Petitioner. None for the Respondent. ORDER JUSTICE D. A. MEHTA - This petition has been preferred challenging primaril .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... statutorily prescribed limitation period. Commissioner (Appeals) in his order dated 30.08.2005 has noted that under Proviso to Section 35 of The Central Excise Rules, 1944 (the Act) a further period of thirty days, after expiry of initial period of sixty days, is available to Commissioner (Appeals) for condoning the delay in preferring the appeal if sufficient cause is made out. However, as the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X