2018 (12) TMI 933

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Suresh For the Respondents : Mrs.Aparna Nandakumar, Senior Panel Counsel ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved against the order of the first respondent dated 29.05.2018, wherein and whereby, the appeal filed by the petitioner against the Order-in-Original No.13 of 2017 dated 27.04.2017 was rejected only on the reason that the said appeal was filed beyond the period as prescribed under the r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he reason that it has to be filed only before the first respondent herein. Therefore, it is contended that on account of such bifurcation of jurisdiction and the confusion caused in the mind of the petitioner with regard to the actual Appellate Authority before whom such appeal has to be filed as stated supra, the appeal was filed before the first respondent with a delay of 25 days, over and above....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd the condonable period has rightly been rejected as time barred. 6. There is no dispute to the fact that the Order-in-Original passed against the petitioner dated 27.04.2017 has indicated that an appeal shall lie before the Commissioner (Appeals), Chennai. Therefore, I find justifiable reasons to believe that the petitioner would have approached the Commissioner (Appeals), Chennai, in time....