https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465064 CESTAT Chennai allowed the assessee's appeal by way of remand, holding that the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was within limitation. The assessee had initially filed the appeal before the wrong authority located in the same building, and subsequently before the correct appellate authority. Applying the principles of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, the Tribunal excluded the period during which the appeal was bona fide prosecuted before the wrong forum, finding that the effective filing was within the statutory 60 days from receipt of the order. The impugned order dismissing the appeal as time-barred was set aside, and the matter remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits without re-examining limitation. en-us Wed, 08 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Dec 2025 19:01:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465064 CESTAT Chennai allowed the assessee's appeal by way of remand, holding that the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was within limitation. The assessee had initially filed the appeal before the wrong authority located in the same building, and subsequently before the correct appellate authority. Applying the principles of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, the Tribunal excluded the period during which the appeal was bona fide prosecuted before the wrong forum, finding that the effective filing was within the statutory 60 days from receipt of the order. The impugned order dismissing the appeal as time-barred was set aside, and the matter remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits without re-examining limitation. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 08 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465064