TMI Blog1987 (2) TMI 317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a against the Order No. 936 of 1980 dated 29-11-1980 passed by the Central Board of Excise Customs statutorily stood transferred to the Tribunal for being heard as an appeal filed before it. 2. When this appeal was taken up for consideration none represented the appellant. Shri Pal appearing for the Collector submitted that the Board had not gone into the merits of the case and it had rejected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tances of the case the Board was justified in rejecting the appeal as barred by time. The contention before the Board was that the order in original was not received by them. But the Board found that it was dispatched by registered post with acknowledgement due and had been received by the appellants on 14-2-1979 as evidenced by the postal acknowledgement receipt. Thus the Board did not accept the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f that authority was not satisfied that the delay should be condoned the Appellate Authority cannot interfere with such an order unless it is satisfied that that order is arbitrary or capricious. From the facts on record, it is difficult to come to the conclusion that the Board s order suffers from any infirmity. In the circumstances, I see no merit in the appeal and accordingly reject the same. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
