9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delay of indefinite period, provided there is sufficient cause to condone the delay and such power is not available to the Commissioner (Appeals). In view of this position, the impugned order is legal and proper. Therefore the appeal is dismissed. - C/448/2005 - 1067/2008 - Dated:- 4-9-2008 - Dr. S.L. Peeran, Member (J) and Shri T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T) S/Shri Ravi Shankar, N. Anand and R.D. Murthy, Advocates, for the Appellant. Ms. Sudha Koka, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)].- This appeal arises from the Order-in-Appeal No. 86/2005, dated 30-9-2005. The brief facts of the case and the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) are given in Paragraphs 5 to 7 of the impugned order which are r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have filed the present appeal contending that appeal filed is within the time limit since the relevant date for filing the appeal would have to be reckoned from date of receipt of order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court on 27-10-2004. 6. On perusal of the order of High Court of Delhi, I notice that the High Court has permitted the counsel to withdraw the petition with liberty to move the appropriate court. In this case the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi had already passed an interim order and the appellant had complied with the directions of the court and subsequently obtained permission to move the appropriate court having jurisdiction over the matter. Instead of moving the court the appellants chose to prefer an appeal before Commissioner ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... given permission to the appellants to seek alternative remedy. Therefore filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) is justified and the delay is to be condoned when the direction has been given by the High Court. He strongly relies on the case laws along with the gist of the decisions in the tabulated form which are reproduced herein below:- S. No. Citation Gist/summary of content 1. CCE v. Tinplate Co. of India Ltd. [1987 (29) E.L.T. 257 (T)] On the day that the Tribunal began to operate on 11-10-1982, the right of appeal to it was conferred on all aggrieved persons against orders passed in the past. It is therefore irrelevant to say that when the order of the appellate collec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Customs Act, 1962. The learned SDR also refers to this Bench judgment rendered in the case of HMT Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai [2002 (142) E.L.T. 143 (Tri.-Bang.)] which is also laid down that the Commissioner (Appeals) does not power to condone the delay beyond the limitation laid down in the statute. It has also been held that plea excludes time taken in pursuing appellate remedies under a wrong forum by applying principle of Section 14 of Limitation Act, 1963 is not acceptable. Further reference has been made by the learned SDR in the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment rendered in the case of Singh Enterprises v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur [2008 (221) E.L.T. 163 (S.C.)] which is also laid down that the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
