https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410814 The department appealed against the dismissal of their case as time-barred by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to a delay in filing the EGM by the respondent. The Tribunal clarified that the term "three months" in Section 129D should be construed as three calendar months, starting from the date of communication of the order. It also addressed the monetary limit for filing appeals before CESTAT and the penalty imposed for late filing of EGM. The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, emphasizing the importance of timely compliance and adherence to legal provisions. en-us Fri, 06 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Aug 2021 08:59:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410814 The department appealed against the dismissal of their case as time-barred by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to a delay in filing the EGM by the respondent. The Tribunal clarified that the term "three months" in Section 129D should be construed as three calendar months, starting from the date of communication of the order. It also addressed the monetary limit for filing appeals before CESTAT and the penalty imposed for late filing of EGM. The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, emphasizing the importance of timely compliance and adherence to legal provisions. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 06 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410814