2017 (6) TMI 53

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Mr. Mohammed Yousuf, AR For the Respondent ORDER Per S. S. Garg The appellant/applicant has filed the application seeking condonation of delay of 948 days in filing the appeal as per Section 35B (5) of Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant has further submitted in the application that they are aggrieved by the Order-in-Appeal No.156/2013 dated 2.4.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Ce....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....013 dated 2.4.2013 and the copy of the same was also despatched to them and the same was duly acknowledged on 2.4.2013. The applicant has further stated that the internal enquiry conducted by the appellant revealed that the order purported to have been passed by the Commissioner (A) was not received by the applicant and there was a possibility that the cover received from the Commissioner (A) cont....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e order dated 3.11.2015 the appellant was informed by the office of the Commissioner that the applicant s request for restoration of the appeal could not be considered as there was no provision for restoration of appeal once the order has been passed. In the process, a delay of 948 days was caused in filing the appeal. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the delay was not delibera....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-Del.) iv. CC vs. Ashok Kumar: 2016 (333) ELT 72 (Del.) v. CC (Preventive) vs. Nylex Traders: 2016 (332) ELT 399 (Bom.) vi. Philips Electronics India Ltd. vs. CC, Chennai: 2015 (327) ELT 258 (Tri.-Chennai) vii. CCE, Delhi-I vs. Hindustan Machines: 2015 (322) ELT 616 (Del.) viii. CC (I&G) vs. AASU EXIM P. Ltd.: 2016 (343) ELT 138 (Del.) 3. On the othe....