9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ishra, AR, for the Respondent. ORDER Heard both the sides. With the consent of both the parties, this appeal is disposed o. Pre-deposit is waived in the circumstances. 2. The appellant is the assessee. The appeal is preferred against the order of Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise and Service Tax, Raipur dated 1-2-2013 rejecting appeal preferred against the adjudication order dated 21- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the President; that adjudication order was issued on 13-6-2012 i.e., after 28-5-2012; and in terms of the amended Section 85(3A) the limitation for preferring an appeal is two months and power is conferred on the Commissioner (Appeals) to condone a delay for a further period of one month. According to the ld. Appellate Commissioner, the appeal was filed with a delay of 112 days beyond the peri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iod of three months, allow an appeal to be presented within a further period of three months. 5. The appellate Commissioner was required to consider the COD application in terms of the pre-amended provision. The adjudication order dated 21-5-2012 was received by the appellant on 14-6-2012. The normal period of three months limitation under pre-amended provision required the appeal to be pres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cision or order of such adjudicating authority, which is made on or after the Finance Bill, 2012, receives the assent of the President. Since the assent of the President was granted on 28-5-2012, the amended provision would not apply to the adjudication order passed by the Assistant Commissioner on 21-5-2012. The date of dispatch of the adjudication order on 13-6-2012, is a wholly irrelevant facto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal beyond the further period of limitation and outside powers of the appellate Commissioner to condone, qua the amended Section (3A) of Section 85, is a fallacious conclusion based on an imperfect analysis of the relevant provision, is unsustainable and is accordingly quashed. The matter is remanded to the ld. Appellate Commissioner for consideration of the COD application on its merits. No cost ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
