TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1300
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the appeal had been filed belatedly without any application for condonation of delay explaining the reasons for the late filing of appeal. 2. The relevant facts in-brief leading to the filing of the instant appeal are stated in brief as under-: (i) The Adjudicating Authority passed the Order-in-Original dated 09.11.2012 (issued on 11.12.2012), a copy of which was received by the Appellant on 15.12.2012. (ii) The Appellant filed the First Appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on 13.03.2013, i.e., after a period of almost two months from the date of receipt of the order, but within a period of three months therefrom. (iii) No application for condonation of delay was filed by the Appellant along with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Appellant was made to believe, by the order itself that no delay had occurred. She further submits that a party cannot be made to suffer for the mistake or mis-statement of the authority, and that such a mis-statement creates a legitimate expectation upon which the Appellant had every right to rely. 5. Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 prescribes the limitation period for filing a First Appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The relevant provision unequivocally stipulates a period of two months from the date of receipt of the order sought to be appealed, with a further condonable period of one month within which the appellate authority may, on sufficient cause being shown, condone the delay. 6. Thus, the outer limit within whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de by the very authority whose order was sought to be challenged in appeal. 10. The doctrine of legitimate expectation is well recognised in administrative law. Where a public authority makes a representation, whether by conduct, communication, or as in the present case, by a statement in an official order, a party acting in reliance on such representation is entitled to protection. It would be unconscionable to visit upon the Appellant the penal consequence of dismissal of an appeal for failure to file a condonation of delay application, when that very failure was the direct and proximate result of the misleading statement made by the authority in its own order. 11. It is a well-established principle of law that a party should not be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....expected to consider the said application in light of the fact that the delay was directly induced by an incorrect statement of law in the Order-in-Original. 15. The Commissioner (Appeals) shall exercise the condonation discretion under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 in consonance with the settled legal position, keeping in mind that the delay was not wilful or contumacious but was occasioned by reliance on an erroneous statement in the Order-in-Original itself. Also keeping in mind that the right of appeal is a substantive statutory right and its exercise should not be defeated by procedural technicalities arising from the authority's own error. 16. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned Order-in- Appeal passed by the learn....