TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns it is held that- it should be presumed that the appeals were preferred before the Tribunal on 5-12-2002, i.e., on 90th day, which was the last day of the limitation. The Tribunal has committed the jurisdictional error in disposing the appeals as barred by limitation. Hence, allow these appeals setting aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the Appellate Authority to consider th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IND-II/2002 as barred by limitation without deciding the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act?" 2. With the consent of the parties, the matter is finally heard. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the present appellants have preferred appeals against the judgment dated 29-8-2002 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, Indore, who dismissed the appeals fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Department on 9-12-2002, i.e., after the delay of six days. 4. The counsel for the appellants pointed out that out of these six days, 6th, 7th and 8th December, 2002 were the holidays. The appellants had dispatched the appeals on 3-12-2002 and as per the instructions of the Postal Department, it should be served within 48 hours, which expires on 5-12-2002. The limitation of 90 days expired on 5- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
