Condonation of delay in appeal proceedings: limitation-based rejection set aside and matter remanded for fresh evidence on illness.

Delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was treated as capable of being explained on remand, because the appeal had been rejected only on limitation for want of evidence supporting the director's illness. Although the appellant had still not produced supporting material before the Tribunal, it held that a further opportunity should be given to place evidence on record and properly explain the delay before the first appellate authority. The delay was condoned, the limitation-based rejection was set aside, and the matter was remanded for reconsideration of the condonation application after allowing evidence to be adduced.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) should be condoned and the matter remanded for fresh consideration of the condonation application.

Analysis: The appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) had been rejected solely on limitation because no evidence of the director's illness had been produced despite opportunity. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had still not produced supporting evidence before it, but considered that the appellant should be given an opportunity to properly explain the delay and place evidence on record before the first appellate authority.

Conclusion: The delay was condoned, the order rejecting the appeal on limitation was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for reconsideration of the condonation application after giving the appellant an opportunity to adduce evidence.

---