9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 1214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n filing the appeal on sufficient cause being shown - In the present case appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeal) after more than a year from the date of receipt of order in original. Hence Commissioner (Appeal) has rightly held that appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation and has dismissed the same on this ground alone. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of SINGH ENTERPRISES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAMSHEDPUR [ 2007 (12) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT] , wherein it has been held that Commissioner (Appeals) could not condone the delay beyond the 30 days in filing the appeal before him. There are no merits in this appeal filed by the appellant - appeal dismis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in filing the appeal by the Commissioner (Appeal). In the present case the appeal has been filed as observed by the Commissioner (Appeal) after more than a year after the receipt of the order of original authority. Section 85 (3A) of the Finance Act, 1994 provides as follows: SECTION 85. Appeals to the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). (3A) An appeal shall be presented within two months from the date of receipt of the decision or order of such adjudicating authority, made on and after the Finance Bill, 2012 receives the assent of the President, relating to service tax, interest or penalty under this Chapter : Provided that the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of Central Excise (Appeals) [hereafter in this Chapter referred to as the Commissioner (Appeals)] within sixty days from the date of the communication to him of such decision or order : Provided that the Commissioner (Appeals) may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of sixty days, allow it to be presented within a further period of thirty days. (2) Every appeal under this section shall be in the prescribed form and shall be verified in the prescribed manner. 7. It is to be noted that the periods sixty days and thirty days have been substituted for within three months and three months by Act 14 of 2001, with effect from 11-5- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is complete exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The Commissioner and the High Court were therefore justified in holding that there was no power to condone the delay after the expiry of 30 days period. 9. Learned counsel for the appellant has emphasized on certain decisions, more particularly, I.T.C. s case (supra) to contend that the High Court and this Court in appropriate cases condoned the delay on sufficient cause being shown. 10. Sufficient cause is an expression which is found in various statutes. It essentially means as adequate or enough. There cannot be any straitjacket formula for accepting or rejecting the explanation furnished for delay caused in taking steps. In the instant case, the explanation offered fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
