TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 23
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated 05.09.2011. In support of rejection of appeal, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has stated that in terms of Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994, the appellant was required to file appeal within three months from the date of receipt of the adjudication order and if the appeal was filed beyond such stipulated time frame, but within a further period of three months, then for condonation of such delay, the appellant was required to show sufficient cause for non-filing of appeal within the prescribed time limit. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant has stated the reason for non-filing of appeal within the stipulated time frame and also within the condonable period provided in the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he date of receipt of the adjudication order. With regard to filing of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 mandates that the same should be presented within three months from the date of receipt of the decision or order by the adjudicating authority. The proviso clause appended to Section 85 of the Act, provides discretion to the Commissioner (Appeals) for condoning the delay up to a further period of three months, if the appeal is not filed within the stipulated period. On perusal of Section 85 of the Act, it reveals that the Commissioner (Appeals) can only entertain the appeal (with condonation of delay application) up to a period of six months from the date of receipt of the adjudication order by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ws that the appeal has to be filed within 60 days but in terms of the proviso further 30 days time can be granted by the appellate authority to entertain the appeal. The proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 35 makes the position crystal clear that the appellate authority has no power to allow the appeal to be presented beyond the period of 30 days. The language used makes the position clear that the legislature intended the appellate authority to entertain the appeal by condoning delay only upto 30 days after the expiry of 60 days which is the normal period for preferring appeal. Therefore, there is complete exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The Commissioner and the High Court were therefore justified in holding that there was ....