https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789622 An appeal filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) beyond sixty days from communication of the order, and also beyond the additional thirty-day condonable period under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, was held to be barred by limitation. The appellate authority had no power to extend limitation beyond the statutory maximum, and the revisional authority's affirmation of that view was found unobjectionable. In writ jurisdiction, no illegality or perversity was shown in the concurrent findings on limitation, so the rejection of the appeal as time-barred was upheld. en-us Thu, 09 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Apr 2026 08:53:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789622 An appeal filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) beyond sixty days from communication of the order, and also beyond the additional thirty-day condonable period under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, was held to be barred by limitation. The appellate authority had no power to extend limitation beyond the statutory maximum, and the revisional authority's affirmation of that view was found unobjectionable. In writ jurisdiction, no illegality or perversity was shown in the concurrent findings on limitation, so the rejection of the appeal as time-barred was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 09 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789622