Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2013 (10) TMI 139

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to condone the delay of one year and fourteen days in filing the appeal. 3. Brief facts necessary to be noticed for deciding the questions raised in the appeal are; the appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, Central Excise (Appeals) being Appeal No. 411 against the order dated 27th November, 1997 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Allahabad. The said appeal was heard on 3rd February, 2003 and ultimately disposed of on 17th November, 2003. The appellant filed a central excise appeal under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 before the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal along with an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. In the application, which was filed fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion of the inordinate delay of over one year. The company was very much in existence. The change of the officers or leaving of the offices in the company did not stop the running of limitation for filing the appeal against the impugned order-in-appeal which was received by the company on 17-11-2003 through courier. The Director or the officials were on the pay-roll of the company at that time. It only shows that the company was too negligent and careless in handling the matter, and as such it cannot be allowed to take advantage of its own wrong. The impugned order had attained finality by lapse of time and the Revenue has acquired a valuable right there under and that right cannot be taken away from them simply because the appellant's comp....