TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1441X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 05 days they have filed the appeal on 17.03.2015. We find that once the order has been received by the appellant on 05.11.2013, they are aware of the consequences and remedies available. We also find that the impugned order is denovo order when the this Tribunal vide order dated 06.06.2012 remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals). Therefore, there was no justification for delay of 405 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. Ld. Advocate representing the applicants submits that they have received the Commissioner (Appeals) Order dated 10.09.2013 only on 05.11.2013. The appeal could not be filed in time as the appellant was dislocated from their existing residence and due to sudden demise of the Director s mother on 10.02.2014. For these reasons they could not file the appeal in time. He pleads that the delay ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vide order dated 06.06.2012 remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals). Therefore, there was no justification for delay of 405 days. The applicants justification of dislocation of residence after the receipt of the order and other personal reasons are not valid grounds for not filing the appeal in time. Therefore, we do not find any justifiable reason to condone the delay of 405 days. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
