Case Law Details
LGW Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST & Excise (CESTAT Kolkata)
It is undisputed by the appellants that they have filed the appeals before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) against the Order-in-Original beyond six months time limit prescribed under Section 85 (3) of Finance Act, 1994 as observed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) herein above.
6. In that circumstances, I hold that the appellant has filed the appeals beyond the time limit prescribed under Section 85 (3) of Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, The appeals filed by the appellants are dismissed as time barred.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT KOLKATA ORDER
The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order wherein the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed their appeal as time barred in terms of Section 85 (3) of Finance Act, 1994.
2. Facts of the case are that the appellant has filed the appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) against the Order-in-Original, whose details are mentioned herein under :
| Sl.No. | Order-in-Original & Date | Date of receipt by the appellant | Date of receipt of Appeal petition in the office of the Commissioner (Appeals) |
| 1 | 31/Refund/ST/D-II/Kol/08 dated 13.01.2009 | 24.01.2009 | 24.08.2012 |
| 2. | 07/Refund/ST/D-II/Kol/09 dated 24.03.2009 | 12.04.2009 | 24.08.2012 |
| 3. | 26/Refund/ST/D-II/Kol/09 dated 30.06.2009 | 11.07.2009 | 24.08.2012 |
3. On entertaining the appeal, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) found that the appeal was filed beyond time limit prescribed under Section 85 (3) of Finance Act, 1994, wherein it is prescribed that the appeal is required to be filed within three months from the communication of the Order-in-Original. The period of limitation can be extended for another three months by showing sufficient reasons for delay in filing the appeal. As the appeals have filed before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) beyond time limit prescribed, therefore, the same were dismissed as time barred by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals).
4. Against the said order, the appellants are before me.
5. It is undisputed by the appellants that they have filed the appeals before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) against the Order-in-Original beyond six months time limit prescribed under Section 85 (3) of Finance Act, 1994 as observed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) herein above.
6. In that circumstances, I hold that the appellant has filed the appeals beyond the time limit prescribed under Section 85 (3) of Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, I do not find any infirmity with the impugned order and the same is upheld.
7. The appeals filed by the appellants are dismissed as time barred.
Dictated and pronounced in the open court)
