Limitation and mandatory pre-deposit bar appeal where no condonation application was filed and statutory conditions remained unmet.

An appeal filed beyond the statutory limitation period without any condonation application is not maintainable, and non-compliance with the mandatory pre-deposit requirement independently defeats the appeal. The document notes that the lower appellate filing was itself substantially delayed beyond the condonable period and was dismissed on both limitation and pre-deposit grounds. The dismissal was sustained because the appellant failed to satisfy the procedural conditions necessary to invoke appellate jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal was liable to be dismissed for being filed beyond limitation without an application for condonation of delay and without compliance with the mandatory pre-deposit requirement.

Analysis: The appeal was filed after expiry of the statutory period and no application for condonation of delay was filed. The requirement of pre-deposit was also not satisfied. The appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) had itself been filed with substantial delay, beyond the period for which delay could be condoned, and was dismissed on that ground as well as for non-compliance with pre-deposit.

Conclusion: The appeal was not maintainable and was dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The dismissal of the appeal was sustained on procedural grounds arising from limitation and non-compliance with the statutory pre-deposit condition.

Ratio Decidendi: An appeal filed beyond the statutory limitation period without a condonation application and without fulfilling the mandatory pre-deposit requirement is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.

---