9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (5) TMI 252X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with respect to the judgment and order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dated 7th July, 2003 whereby the Tribunal has confirmed the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) had dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant as being beyond the period of limitation. Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, hereinafter referred t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssioner (Appeals). 3. As far as the above statement of Mr. Nigam is concerned, a Division Bench of this Court has already taken a view in Doaba Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. v. CEGAT, New Delhi, 2004 (169) E.L.T. 258 (All.) wherein the Division Bench has held that if the statute provides for a period of limitation and further maximum period for which the delay can be condoned, the authority cannot exten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period of extension specifically provided under the statute. We are of the view that the proposition laid down by the Apex Court is not in any way helpful to extend the limitation under Section 35 of the Act. We have no reason to take a view different from what has been taken by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Doaba Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. (supra).
6. The appeal is dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
