NOORANI TEXTILE MILLS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal filed before him as barred by limitation on the ground that the period of limitation is to be computed from 27.9.99 which is the date of initial order of Deputy Commissioner rejecting the assessee's plea for condonation of delay in filing the declaration under Rule 57T of the Central Excise Rules, and not to be computed from 26.10.99 which is the date when the office of the Deputy Commissioner issued a clarification. Learned Shri Anand submits that even if the limitation period is to be calculated from 27.9.99, the delay is only to the extent of about 7 days and if the appellants had been put on notice, they would have filed an application for condonation of delay for the consideration of the Commissioner (Appeals). He, therefore, prays that the order may be set aside and the matter remanded to the lower appellate authority. The prayer is opposed by the learned DR, Shri Jagdish Singh who contends that it is clear from the language of the impugned order that the appellants were heard on the question of time bar.

(2.) ON a careful consideration of the rival submissions, and a perusal of the records, I am of the view that interests of justice require that the matter should go back for fresh decision to the Commissioner (Appeals) who shall hear the appellants on their explanation for delay in filing the appeal before him, and subsequently on the appeal itself. I order accordingly. He shall pass fresh orders after extending a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellants on the condonation of delay application to be filed by them and on the appeal.

(3.) THE appeal is thus allowed by way of remand.