https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372528 The appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner (A) due to being filed 298 days beyond the prescribed time limit, citing factory layoff as the reason for delay. The Commissioner (A) held that the delay was not condonable under Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994, which allows a 60-day window for appeal submission. Referring to the limited jurisdiction to condone delays beyond the specified period, the Commissioner (A) upheld the dismissal, emphasizing adherence to appeal timelines as per statutory provisions. en-us Wed, 28 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Dec 2018 08:22:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372528 The appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner (A) due to being filed 298 days beyond the prescribed time limit, citing factory layoff as the reason for delay. The Commissioner (A) held that the delay was not condonable under Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994, which allows a 60-day window for appeal submission. Referring to the limited jurisdiction to condone delays beyond the specified period, the Commissioner (A) upheld the dismissal, emphasizing adherence to appeal timelines as per statutory provisions. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 28 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372528