Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S.Alom Extrusions Ltd. (Formerly ... vs Commissioner Of Central Excise & ... on 6 September, 2017
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA
EASTERN ZONAL BENCH: KOLKATA
Appeal No. E/76288/17
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.214/CE/B-II/2017 dated 31.03.2017 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Bhubaneswar.)
M/s.Alom Extrusions Ltd. (Formerly M/s.OEL Extrusions Ltd.)
Applicant (s)/Appellant (s)
Vs.
Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, BBSR-II
Respondent (s)
Appearance:
Shri Deoki Nandan Soni, Group CFO for the Appellant Shri D.Haldar, AC(AR) for the Revenue CORAM:
Honble Shri P.K.Choudhary, Member(Judicial) Date of Hearing/Decision :- 06.09.2017 ORDER NO.FO/A/77324/2017 Per Shri P.K.Choudhary.
This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. 214/CE/B-II/2017 dated 31.03.2017 passed by the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Bhubaneswar, who has rejected the appeal as time barred.
2. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records.
3. I find that the Order-in-Original dated 28.08.2017 was received by the appellant on 20.10.2014. The appeal was filed on 18.12.2014. Thus, the appeal was filed well within the statutory period of 60(sixty) days. I find that the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) did not decide the appeal on merits, but rejected the same as time barred.
4. On facts as stated above and under the circumstances of the case it would be appropriate to remand the appeal to the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) to decide the same on merits without going into the aspect of limitation. Needless to mention a reasonable opportunity of hearing be granted the appellant. All issues are kept open. Both sides are at liberty to produce evidences in their favour. Appeal is allowed by way of remand.
(Operative part of the order was pronounced in the open court.)
SD/
(P.K.CHOUDHARY) MEMBER(JUDICIAL)
sm
2
Appeal No.E/76288/17