2018 (1) TMI 1273

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....endent (AR) for the Respondent ORDER The above appeal is filed being aggrieved by the rejection of the appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground of time-bar. 2. The appellant had opted for VCES Scheme and filed VCE - I Declaration on 29.10.2013 and the same was not fully considered by the original authority, who levied interest and penalty without giving immunity as provided by t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... from the date of Order-in-Original dated 16.6.2014 and thus rejected the appeal as time-barred. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant is now before the Tribunal. 3. On behalf of the appellant, ld. counsel Shri S. Kannappan appeared on 23.10.2017 and argued the matter. The appeal was then adjourned to 3.11.2017 and the ld. AR Shri Arul C. Durairaj was heard in reply. 4. The ld. counsel ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d the appeal having been filed before Commissioner (Appeals) on 25.6.2015 is well within the time. Therefore, the matter may be remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to consider the appeal on merits. 5. Ld. AR Shri Arul C. Durairaj reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 6. Heard both sides. 7. It is correct that Section 74 prescribes two years time for filing rectification of mis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... view that the appeal is not time-barred. The statute provides for filing such an application for rectification of mistake. Therefore, Commissioner (Appeals) ought to have considered the appeal to have been filed within the time. The Tribunal in the case of R.S. Constructions Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem vide Final Order No.18/2011 dated 7.1.2011 has analyzed a similar issue and held ....