Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Juhi Alloys Ltd vs Cce, Kanpur on 5 June, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
COURT NO. III
Appeal No. E/61/2011-EX(SM)
[Arising out of Order-In-Appeal No-485/CE/APPL/KNP/2010 DT. 24.09.2010 passed by CCE, Kanpur]
For approval and signature:
Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member
1
Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2
Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3
Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
4
Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
M/s. Juhi Alloys Ltd. Appellant
Vs.
CCE, Kanpur Respondents
Coram: Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member Appearance:
None for the Appellant Shri. V.P. Batra, AR for the Respondent Date of Hearing: 05.06.2013 FINAL ORDER NO._56541/2013_ Per Ms. Archana Wadhwa:
Nobody appeared on behalf of the appellant. Accordingly, I have heard Shri V.P. Batra, learned AR and I have gone through the impugned order.
2. Commissioner (Appeals) vide his impugned order has rejected the appeal on the grounds of time bar in as much there was a delay of 8 months and 26 days in filing the appeal before him. It is well settled law that Commissioner has no power to condone the delay beyond the period of 30 days. Inasmuch as the delay in the present case was much more than 30 days, Commissioner has rightly rejected the appeals on the ground of bar limitation. The said order is accordingly upheld and the appeal is rejected.
(Pronounced in the open Court) (Archana Wadhwa) Member (Judicial) Jyoti*