9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (5) TMI 367X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... kraborty, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri M.B. Bal, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. - Heard both sides. 2. Applicant filed this Application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 9,08,273/- (Rupees Nine Lakh Eight Thousand Two Hundred and Seventy Three only) and penalty. The demand was confirmed after denying the CENVAT Credit. 3. Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct, 1994 and as per the provisions of Section 85 of the Finance Act the limitation for filing Appeal is three months and the Commissioner (Appeals) can condone further delay of 3 months on showing sufficient cause for not filing Appeal within the normal period of limitation. Hence the impugned order treating the Appeal under the Central Excise Act is not sustainable. 5. Revenue pointed out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nable period by the Commissioner (Appeals) as provided under Section 35 of Central Excise Act. The only contention of Appellant is that they were under the impression that the proceedings were under the Finance Act, 1994 in respect of Service Tax therefore as per the provisions of Section 85 of Finance Act Appeal is to be filed within 3 months and Commissioner is empowered to condone further perio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s per the provisions of Section 35 of Central Excise Act the Commissioner is empowered to condone delay of 30 days beyond the normal period of limitation of 60 days as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises v. CCE, Jamshedpur - 2008 (221) E.L.T. 163 (S.C.). 7. In view of this we are taking the Appeal for disposal itself along with Stay Application. As the adjudic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
