ORDER
C. Satapathy, Member (T)
1. Heard both the sides. The impugned order-in-original was passed on 14.5.93. It is the case of the appellants that they did not receive a copy of the same and only subsequently a copy of the same was received by them on 1.6.2001 under cover of a letter dt. 30.5.2001. Admittedly the appeal against the said Order-in-Original was filed before the Commissioner Appeals) only on 10.7.2002. Even if it has to be considered that the appellant received the Order-in-original only on 1.6.2001, still the appeal has been filed after more than a year on 10.7.2002. The Commissioner (Appeals) is a creature of the statute, which prescribes a time limit of 60 days for filing appeal before him. The statute also provides that the Commissioner (Appeals) can condone a delay up to 30 days beyond the period of 60 days. He has no power to condone delay in filing appeal beyond the statutorily prescribed period. As such, the impugned order passed by him rejecting the appeal as barred by limitation is legal and proper and calls for no interference. The present appeal against the said order is rejected.