Limitation for appeal runs from the first speaking order's communication when that order itself states the appellate remedy.

Where the challenged order is the first speaking order communicating the adjudication and expressly stating that an appeal lies within three months from its communication, limitation must be counted from that communication. On that basis, the Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in dismissing the appeal as time-barred. The dismissal was set aside and the matter was remanded for decision on merits after granting the appellant an opportunity of hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) could be dismissed as time-barred when the order challenged was the first speaking order communicating the adjudication and indicating the remedy of appeal.

Analysis: The appeal was filed against the first speaking order passed on the assessee's request. The order itself indicated that an appeal would lie to the Commissioner (Appeals) within three months from the date of communication. Following its earlier view in a similar matter, the Tribunal held that, in such circumstances, the Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in rejecting the appeal on the ground of delay.

Conclusion: The dismissal of the appeal as barred by limitation was set aside and the matter was remanded for decision on merits after giving the appellant an opportunity of hearing.

---