TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (12) TMI 735
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....For the Respondent : Mr. A. P. Srinivas - R2 JUDGMENT (Delivered by R. Sudhakar,J.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the appellant as against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 04.04.2014 made in Final Order No.40262/2014. 2. The appellant is engaged in the manufacturing of SG & Grey Iron castings falling under Chapter sub-heading 73251000 of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y, thereby dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant preferred further appeal before the Tribunal along with an application to condone the delay of 73 days. 3. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed along with an application to condone the delay of 73 days holding that it is not a case of misplacement of order, but it is a clear case of gross negligence and inaction on the part ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Commissioner (Appeals), who held against the appellant. In the course of the proceedings before the Commissioner (Appeals), it appears one M.Ramakrishnan, Senior Manager appeared for personal hearing on 28.8.2012. Prior to that, he submitted his request for being relieved from service on 22.6.2012. In view of the on going proceeding, it appears that he was not relieved, but subsequently, reli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....same is borne out by records and the appellant's plea is bona fide. In our considered opinion, the same would constitute "sufficient cause" for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed period. 7. The above said view of this Court is fortified by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of The Collector, Land Acquisition v. Katiji, [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC), wherein it has been held ....