Limitation for refund appeal upheld where delay remained unexplained despite notice of appeal rights and filing period.

An appeal against rejection of a refund claim was found time-barred because the original order expressly stated that it was appealable and specified the limitation period for filing. The appellant failed to show any sufficient basis for excluding the delay from its own conduct, and even after disregarding the interval between the order and its receipt, the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) remained about four months late. The appeal was therefore dismissed as barred by limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal against rejection of the refund claim was barred by limitation.

Analysis: The order rejecting the refund claim expressly indicated that it was appealable and specified the time for filing an appeal. The appellant did not establish any sufficient basis for treating the delay as not attributable to it. Even after overlooking the interval between the passing of the order and its receipt, there was still a delay of about four months in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals).

Conclusion: The appeal was held to be barred by limitation and was dismissed.

---