Natural justice in limitation matters requires hearing on delay before an appeal is rejected as time-barred

An appeal should not be rejected as time-barred without first hearing the appellant on the delay and considering the reasons offered, particularly where service of the original order is disputed. The appellate authority had dismissed the matter on limitation without examining the plea that the order had not been served and without giving an opportunity to explain the delay. The order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded to the jurisdictional Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh consideration in accordance with law and the principles of natural justice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal dismissed as time-barred could be sustained without affording the appellants an opportunity to explain the delay and whether the matter required remand for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The appellate order was found to have rejected the appeal as time-barred without examining the appellants' plea that the original order had not been served on them and without giving them an opportunity to explain the delay. It was held that before an appeal is dismissed on limitation grounds, the party must be heard on the question of delay and the reasons must be considered. The record also showed that the copy relied upon by the appellants was attested much later than the original order, making the plea on service and delay material for consideration.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the jurisdictional Commissioner (Appeals) to give the appellants an opportunity to explain the delay and then decide the appeal in accordance with law and the principles of natural justice.

---