9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (3) TMI 202X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e by the adjudicating authority, against which an appeal came to be filed belatedly before Commissioner (Appeals). Commissioner (Appeals) did not condone the delay as, by virtue of provisions of Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act), the appellate authority does not have powers to entertain an appeal beyond the statutory period of 90 (ninety) days (60+30). The petitioner carried the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... may be extra-ordinary cases where assessees may not be in a position to challenge the order of the adjudicating authority before the Commissioner (Appeals) within a period of 90 days from the date of communication of the order, we are of the view that in such extraordinary cases where an assessee can show extra ordinary circumstances explaining the delay and also gross injustice done by the adjud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 35 of the Act are constitutionally valid and if legislature has provided for limitation period of 60 days for filing an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) along with power of condonation of delay vested in the said appellate authority for a period of 30 days after the expiry of the statutory period of 60 days, the provisions cannot be termed to be arbitrary or bad in law or violative of an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing whether the delay is explained or not the Court would enter into merits of the controversy. 5. If the facts of the case are examined, as can be seen from order of Commissioner (Appeals) dated 8-3-2007 the impugned order made by the adjudicating authority dated 31-1-2006 was received by an employee of the petitioner-Company on 7-2-2006 and the appeal was actually presented only on 7-2-2007. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
