2011 (1) TMI 181

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... After hearing both sides, duly represented by Shri A.R. Madhav Rao, Advocate for the appellant and Shri Amrish Jain, SDR for the revenue, we find that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) has rejected the appeal on time bar by refusing to condone the delay of 32 days in filing the appeal on the ground that he does not have powers to condone the delay beyond 30 days. While we do not have any quar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....esulting in delay of 32 days. In the above scenario, the learned advocate submits that the period during which the appeal was lying in the office of Commissioner, has to be excluded for the purpose of computing the delay in filing the present appeal. However, he fairly agrees that the above facts and legal issues were never brought to the notice of the Commissioner (Appeals) and never raised befor....