2001 (3) TMI 201

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s appeal filed by the appellant against the Order-in-Appeal No. 52/99 (M-II), dated 15-3-1999 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is as to whether the delay of one day in filing the appeal was required to have been condoned by the Commissioner (Appeals) or not for the reasons given by the appellant. Commissioner (Appeals) has noted that there is seven days delay and not one day and he is not in a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issioner (Appeals) noting that there was negligence on the part of the appellant even for one day (according to Commissioner (Appeals) the delay is seven days), the delay was not condoned and the appeal was rejected on that ground. He pointed out that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Another v. Mst. Katiji - reported in 1987 (28) E.L.T. 185 has lai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is accepted, there was no delay. Appellant had also explained the reason for one day's delay (seven days according to Commissioner (Appeals)'s. The salient law as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cited case is that for marginal delay, appeal should not be dismissed as it would cause serious injury and hardship to the party. This aspect of the matter has been laid down by the Tribunal....