9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 378X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sp; Present for the respondent: Shri Amresh Jain, A.R. Per Justice Ajit Bharihoke (Oral): This appeal is directed against the order in appeal No. 38/RPR-I/2012 dated 5.3.2012 whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the plea of the appellant for condoning delay of 29 days for filing of appeal and dismissed the appeal. 2. Along with the appeal, the appellant has moved an applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant gives a reasonable explanation for the delay caused in filing of appeal. 5. In the instant case the appellant in the application for condonation of delay explained that his Accountant who was dealing with the matter met with an accident as a result of which he was confined to bed from 6.4.2011 to 5.7.2011 and because of this reason the appeal could not be filed in time. Commissioner (Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esponsible for taking policy decision on the issue connected with the central excise matter. He was the person responsible for dealing with the counsel for the appellant. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that because of accident Shri Sahoo was confined to bed from 6.4.11 to 5.7.11, as such, he could not meet and brief the counsel and immediately after joining the duty, he ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and ordinarily the doors of justice should not be shut to a party on technical ground of limitation. Thus taking into account the overall facts of this case we are unable to sustain the order of Commissioner (Appeals) whereby he dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation. We accordingly, condone the delay of 29 days for filing of appeal and set aside the impugned order. The matter is remande ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
