2017 (2) TMI 492

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Beevi, C.S.] 1. The above appeal is filed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) who dismissed the application filed by the appellant to condone the delay of 28 days in filing the appeal and consequently dismissed the appeal. 2. On behalf of the appellant the Ld. Counsel Ms. A.S.K. Swetha submitted that the appeal ought to have been filed before Commissioner (Appeals) on or befo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rits rather than dismiss the same. 3. On behalf of the department, Ld AR Sh. Guna Ranjan reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that the appellant had stated in the application for condonation of delay that the delay was caused due to misplacing of the papers in the office and also for the reason that concerned official dealing with the files was on leave. That these are not ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the case on merits rather than taking technical approach in disposing the matter. In various judgments the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the expression 'sufficient cause' used in Limitation Act, 1963 and similar other statutes are elastic enough to enable courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner which sub-serves the ends of justice. Though no hard and fast rule is laid, the Ap....