Condonation of delay requires proper examination where medical incapacity is cited to explain a late appeal.

An appeal filed beyond the prescribed limitation period may still be admitted within the further statutory period if sufficient cause for delay is shown. The appellant relied on the director's medical condition and a supporting medical certificate to explain the delay, but the condonation request had not been properly examined. The limitation-based dismissal was therefore set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh consideration of the application for condonation of delay.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was liable to be dismissed as time-barred, and whether the appellant had shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay under the Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis: The appeal had been filed beyond the prescribed period, but the statute empowered the appellate authority to admit it within a further period of three months if sufficient cause was shown. The appellant relied on the medical condition of its director and produced a medical certificate in support of the delay. As the question of condonation had not been properly considered, the matter required fresh adjudication.

Conclusion: The dismissal for limitation was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide afresh after considering the application for condonation of delay.

---