2012 (1) TMI 122

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mmissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER Heard both sides. 2. The applicant filed that application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest and penalty. The appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as time-barred. 3. The contention of applicant is that the Commissioner (Appeals) is dismissed the appeal as time-barred on the ground that the adjudi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Commissioner (Appeals) and Commissioner (Appeals) has not pointed out, during the arguments, regarding the aspect of time-bar. Hence, the impugned order is not sustainable. 4. The contention of Revenue is that as the appeal is dismissed as time-barred therefore, the applicant is required to deposit the amount in dispute. 5. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X