M/S. H&N Agency vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Salem
- CitationAppeal No.89/2013-ST, dated 26.04.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Ap
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an appellate authority dismisses an appeal as time-barred under the 60-day limit in Section 85(3) of the Finance Act, 1994, without recording the date on which the impugned order was received by the appellant, the limitation question cannot be resolved on the record. The period is to be computed from the date of receipt of the impugned order, so that date must be ascertained on the basis of evidence, and the appellate authority must call for the original record and determine both the date of receipt and the date of filing before deciding whether the appeal was beyond limitation. Before an order on limitation is passed, the appellant is entitled to a hearing in accordance with the principles of natural justice. Where limitation is resolved in the appellant's favour, the appeal must then proceed to be heard on its merits.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.89/2013-ST, dated 26.04.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Salem]
M/s. H&N AGENCY APPELLANT
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, SALEM RESPONDENT
Appearance:
For the Appellant None
For the Respondent Shri K.P. Muralidharan, AC (AR)
CORAM:
Honble Shri D.N. Panda, Judicial Member
Date of hearing/decision 08-09-2015
FINAL ORDER NO. 41225 / 2015
None present for the appellant. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal holding that the same was filed beyond the period of 60 days prescribed under Section 85 (3) of the Finance Act, 1994, which was amended with effect from 28.05.2012 providing appeal to be filed within 60 days from the date of receipt of the impugned order.
2. However, learned Commissioner has not recorded the date on which when the impugned was received by the appellant. Once that is absent in his order, it is difficult to calculate the limitation. Therefore, matter is sent back to learned Commissioner (Appeals) to call back original record to ascertain the date of receipt of the impugned order by the appellant and examine whether the date of filing of the appeal before him was beyond limitation. Once these two dates are properly ascertained on the basis of evidence, the issue of limitation can be resolved. Appellant is entitled to the course of natural justice in the course of readjudication of limitation issue before an order is passed thereon by Commissioner (Appeals). It is needless to say that if appellant succeeds on limitation, appeal shall be heard on merit. (Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(D.N. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER
ksr 21-09-2015
DRAFT Remarks
I II III
Date of dictation 08.09.2015
Draft Order - Date of typing 16.09.2015
Fair Order Typing 21.09.2015
Date of number and date of dispatch 22/09/2015
2 ST/41238/2013
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free