ORDER
Shri G.A. Brahma Deva
1. These are three appeals filed by the appellant with reference to the respective impugned orders, passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore.
2. At the outset, it was pointed out by the Departmental Representative that there was an inordinate delay in filing the appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals). Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed these appeals as barred by time. The Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the delay has been condoned by the Tribunal.
3. Smt. Radha Arun, appearing for the revenue submitted that there was delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and that has been condoned as per misc order no. 432/99 dated 9.4.99. But no where it was held that delay before the Commissioner to be condoned. She also drew my attention to the finding portion in para 5 of the impugned order dated 9.9.97, which is as under:
“5. I have carefully examined the request of the appellant for condonation of delay and acceptance of the appeal for decision on merit. As per the provisions of section 35 of CESA 1944, Commissioner (A), if satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the prescribed period of 3 months can allow the said appeal to be presented within further period of 3 months. Therefore, even if the Commissioner (A) considers for condonation of delay, he cannot condone the delay beyond a further period of 3 months. In this case, the delay is beyond 3 months, i.e. about 145 days. (about 5 months). Accordingly, as per provisions of section 35 of the CESA 1944, even Commissioner (A) is not competent to condone such delay beyond 3 months. Therefore, the appeal has to be rejected as time barred since the appeal was filed after a lapse of 145 days (about five months) after expiry of normal period of 3 months.”
She also submitted that in all the three appeals there was an inordinate delay in filing the appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals). The counsel conceded that there was an inordinate delay beyond 3 months and Commissioner is right in observing that he has no power to condone the delay beyond the period of three months. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that there was inordinate delay, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order, in dismissing the appeals as barred by time. Accordingly these appeals are dismissed.
(Pronounced and dictated in the open court.)