Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Manuals Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Sri Balaji Agency Versus CCE & ST, Trichy

2015 (12) TMI 1359 - CESTAT CHENNAI

Condonation of delay - Power of commissioner to condone delay beyond condonable period - Held that:- Supreme Court clearly held that the Commissioner (Appeals) has no power to condone the delay after expiry of 30 days period as provided under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994. We agree with the submission of the Revenue that there is no power of Commissioner (Appeals) to condone the delay. The wrong mentioning of the period of limitation in the preamble cannot override the statutory provision. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

: M. N. Bharathi, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) ORDER Per P. K. Choudhary Heard Shri M.N. Bharathi, learned Advocate for the appellant and Shri B. Balamurugan learned AC( AR), for the respondent. As the issue lies on a narrow compass, after disposing the stay application we take up the appeal for hearing. 2. After hearing both sides and on perusal of the records, We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal on the ground that the appeal was filed beyo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dvocate on behalf of the appellant drew the Attention of the Bench to the Preamble of the adjudication Order. It is seen from the Preamble of the adjudication order that the appeal would be filed within 3 months from the date of receipt of the order under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994. Ld. Advocate submits that limitation under Section 85 was amended on 28.5.2012 and thereafter the adjudication order. So the appellant should not be punished for the wrong act on the part of Revenue. Ld. Adv .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Finance Act, 1994. It is submitted that the Tribunal consistently held that on the plea of wrong mentioning of period of filling appeal of three months in preamble of the adjudication order, delay cannot be condoned by overriding the statutory limit of filling the appeal. He relies upon the following decisions :- (1) Raghav Industries Vs CC Amritsar 2008 (231) ELT 298 (Tri.-Chennai) (2) Sagar Enterprises Vs CC Tuticorin 2009 (247) ELT 410 (Tri.-Chennai) We have carefully examined submissions of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

F was amended w.e.f. 28-05-2012 and the adjudication order was passed subsequently on 25-07-2012 i.e. after the amendment. 5. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court on identical issue of condonation of dealy in the case of Singh Enterprises (supra) held as under :- "8. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) as also the Tribunal being creatures of Statute are vested with jurisdiction to condone the delay beyond the permissible period provided under the Statute. The period upto whic .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 
 


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version