https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444991 CESTAT Allahabad dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant against the Commissioner (Appeal)'s decision to reject their appeal on limitation grounds. The original appeal was filed over a year after receiving the order, exceeding the two-month statutory period under Section 85(3A) of Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner (Appeal) can only condone delays up to one month upon sufficient cause. Following SC precedent in Singh Enterprises v. Commissioner of C. Ex., Jamshedpur, CESTAT held that delays beyond 30 days cannot be condoned, confirming the Commissioner's dismissal was correct. en-us Fri, 27 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Oct 2023 08:32:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444991 CESTAT Allahabad dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant against the Commissioner (Appeal)'s decision to reject their appeal on limitation grounds. The original appeal was filed over a year after receiving the order, exceeding the two-month statutory period under Section 85(3A) of Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner (Appeal) can only condone delays up to one month upon sufficient cause. Following SC precedent in Singh Enterprises v. Commissioner of C. Ex., Jamshedpur, CESTAT held that delays beyond 30 days cannot be condoned, confirming the Commissioner's dismissal was correct. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444991