9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (5) TMI 75X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that - The Commissioner (Appeals) has no power to condone the delay in filing the appeal beyond the further period of three months as laid down in terms of proviso to section 85(3) of the Finance Act, 1994. The delay of 386 days is beyond the powers of the Commissioner (Appeals) to condone. Therefore, he has rightly dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. The Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , we find that the appeal itself can be taken up for disposal. 2. The appellant submits that the appeal had to be filed before the Tribunal on or before 6th October, 2008 against the impugned order but they could file the appeal only on 21-10-2008 as their Consultant Shri Pawan Kr. Agarwal suffered an injury in his eyes, which resulted into two eyes operations on 26-9-2008 and 10-10-2008. There i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... donation of delay of 386 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal as the appeal was beyond the limitation period prescribed under section 85(3) of Chapter V of Finance Act, 1994. Under section 85(3) ibid, the appeal has to be preferred within three months of the communication of the order appealed against and under proviso to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned SDR. The Commissioner (Appeals) has no power to condone the delay in filing the appeal beyond the further period of three months as laid down in terms of proviso to section 85(3) of the Finance Act, 1994. The delay of 386 days is beyond the powers of the Commissioner (Appeals) to condone. Therefore, he has rightly dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. The Order of the Commissioner (Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
