TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Excise (Appeals) may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of two months, allow it to be presented within a further period of one month - Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 provides that any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under the Act, may appeal to 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. The provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est, has been dismissed for the reason that it was filed beyond the statutory time limit of two months prescribed for filing the appeal and in fact, was filed had even beyond the further period of one month contemplated in section 85 of the Finance Act 1994 [the Finance Act ]. 2. The case was called out but learned counsel for the appellant has not appeared to press the appeal. A perusal of the order sheet indicates that learned counsel for the appellant has not been appearing since 2019. This would be clear from the following orders passed by the Tribunal: Dated: 19.06.2019 None appeared for the appellant. Perusal shows that notice has been received by the appellant on 22 May, 2019. However, in the interest of justice, one opp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the appellant failed to submit any evidence/ reason that he had received the order only on August 10, 2016, which was after a lapse of approximately one year and nine months. 6. The issue, therefore, that arises for consideration is as to whether the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in dismissing the appeal for the reason that it was filed beyond the statutory period of two months provided in the Statute with a further provision that a further delay of one month could be condoned by the Commissioner (Appeals) provided, he was satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the stipulated time. 7. In the present case, the appeal was filed not only beyond the statutory limit of tw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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. The provisions of Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 are pari materia with Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act. The Supreme Court held that the period upto which the prayer for condonation can be accepted is limited by the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 35 of the Act and the position is crystal clear that the appellate authority has no power to allow the appeal to be presented beyond the period of thirty days after the expiry period of sixty days. In other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
