TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (2) TMI 93
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rvice Tax, confirming the demand with penalty and interest, has been dismissed for the reason that it was filed beyond the statutory time limit of two months prescribed for filing the appeal and in fact, was filed had even beyond the further period of one month contemplated in section 85 of the Finance Act 1994 [the Finance Act ]. 2. The case was called out but learned counsel for the appellant has not appeared to press the appeal. A perusal of the order sheet indicates that learned counsel for the appellant has not been appearing since 2019. This would be clear from the following orders passed by the Tribunal: "Dated: 19.06.2019 None appeared for the appellant. Perusal shows that notice has been received by the appellant on 22 May, 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (Appeals) noticed that the appellant failed to submit any evidence/ reason that he had received the order only on August 10, 2016, which was after a lapse of approximately one year and nine months. 6. The issue, therefore, that arises for consideration is as to whether the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in dismissing the appeal for the reason that it was filed beyond the statutory period of two months provided in the Statute with a further provision that a further delay of one month could be condoned by the Commissioner (Appeals) provided, he was satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the stipulated time. 7. In the present case, the appeal was filed not only beyond the statu....