Statutory limitation and condonation limits bar delayed appeals absent a proper application and credible sufficient cause.

An appellate authority may treat an appeal as time-barred where the statute allows filing within the prescribed period and condonation only for a short additional period on proof of sufficient cause. A delayed appeal filed without a proper condonation application, and supported only by a vague illness explanation and an unsubstantiated medical certificate, was correctly refused as beyond jurisdiction. The authority had no power to condone delay beyond the statutory limit, and no violation of natural justice arose from rejecting the appeal on limitation grounds.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was barred by limitation and whether delay beyond the prescribed period could be condoned in the absence of a condonation application and sufficient cause.

Analysis: The relevant provision allowed an appeal to be filed within two months from receipt of the order and empowered the Commissioner (Appeals) to condone only a further delay of one month on showing sufficient cause. The appeal was filed beyond the normal period and no application seeking condonation of delay was filed along with it. The explanation of illness was found unsupported and vague, and the medical certificate was treated as an afterthought. In these circumstances, there was no violation of natural justice and no jurisdictional error in treating the appeal as time-barred, as the appellate authority had no power to condone delay beyond the statutorily permitted period.

Conclusion: The appeal was rightly held to be barred by limitation, and the refusal to condone delay was upheld against the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute permits condonation only up to a fixed additional period on proof of sufficient cause, the appellate authority cannot entertain a delayed appeal beyond that limit in the absence of a proper condonation request and a credible explanation.

---