2017 (1) TMI 1238

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....en caused on account of the reasons stated in the application. Therefore by taking a liberal view, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to hear the appeal on merit. 2. The present appeal is directed against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner vide his Order dated 19.02.2015 vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal as time-barred. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the present appeal has been filed by Shri Sarath V. Nathen, son and legal heir of late A. Venunathen, former Area Manager of M/s. Professional Couriers, Mumbai. Shri A. Venunathen was conducting courier business and was also supervising courier business carried out by the agent. For his own business, A Venunathen used ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rest and imposed penalty under Section 78 of the Act only in terms of the remand order. Aggrieved by the said order, appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order dated 19.02.2015 rejected the appeal on the ground of time-bar without going into the merits of the case. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has filed the present appeal. 3. I have heard the counsel for the parties and have perused the records. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order rejecting the appeal as time-bar is not sustainable in law and is liable to be set aside. He further submitted that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) should have decided the appeal on merit rather than....