Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (2) TMI 783 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2016 (2) TMI 783 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI - Condonation of delay - whether appeal should be filed within 90 days? - appellant submitted that admittedly the appeal was filed after 97 days from the date of receipt of the order - Held that:- Singh Enterprises [2007 (12) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ] wherein the Supreme Court has held that the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 35 makes the position clear that the appellate authority has no power to allow the appeal to be presented beyond the pe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

7/14 - A/85326/16/SMB, S/85327/16/SMB - Dated:- 14-1-2016 - MR. S.S. GARG, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) For the Petitioner : Shri Dwarkadas S. Ladda, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri R.K. Maji, (AR) ORDER This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. AV (57)69/2014 dated 20.03.2014 passed by the Commissioner wherein the Commissioner has dismissed the appeal of the appellant on limitation without going into the merits of the case. Being aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) the appell .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent or supply agency service rendered by three different service agency. The department conducted the audit of the appellants factory and raised objection on the invoice issued by the service provider for not bearing the service tax registration no. and asked the appellant to reverse the credit taken on improper documents. Revenue also recorded the statement of the appellant under Section 14 of Central Excise Act, 1944. Thereafter a show-cause notice dated 19.07.2013 was issued for availing ina .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

section the Commissioner (Appeals) may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the period of 60 days, allow it to be presented within a period of further 30 days. But in the present case, admittedly appeal was filed after 97 days of the date of the receipt of the order. Therefore, the same was dismissed without going into the merits of the case by the Comm. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) the present appeal h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he native place and he could not resume his duties for more than 3 months. He also submitted that the ld. Comm. should have decided the matter on merits instead of dismissing the same on limitation. In support, he relied upon the judgment in the case of Jai Hind Bottling Co. P. Ltd. 2002 (146) ELT 273. 4. On the other hand, ld. AR submitted that the appeal has rightly been dismissed on account of limitation because under Section 35 the Commissioner (Appeals) has the power to condone the delay fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version