Ninety-day limitation period from March 1, 2022, applies uniformly to all judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings.

The appellant challenged an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) dated 29.09.2025.

The CESTAT had upheld the dismissal of the appellant’s statutory appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the grounds that it was filed beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

The underlying order was received by the appellant on 18.02.2022, and the appeal was subsequently filed on 30.05.2022.

While the Tribunal excluded the COVID-19 period (15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022) per Supreme Court directions, it held that the 60-day limitation period commenced on 01.03.2022 and expired on 29.04.2022.

Because the appellant had not filed a condonation application for the additional 30-day discretionary period, the Tribunal rejected the contention that the limitation extended to 90 days.

1. Whether the 90-day extension period granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020 applies uniformly to all litigants regardless of whether their limitation period expired during the pandemic window.

2. Whether the appeal filed on 30.05.2022 was within the limitation period considering the exclusion of public holidays.

Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which prescribes a limitation period of 60 days for filing an appeal, with a proviso allowing an extension of a further 30 days upon showing sufficient cause.

Directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020 (Order dated 10.01.2022), which directed that the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 be excluded for limitation purposes and provided a mandatory 90-day limitation period starting from 01.03.2022 for cases where limitation would have expired during the excluded period.

The High Court rejected the Revenue's narrow interpretation that the 90-day grace period only applied to cases where limitation strictly expired between 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022.

The Court reasoned that such an interpretation would create an "artificial distinction" between categories of litigants—those whose limitation expired during the pandemic and those whose limitation began just before or during it—which was never the intent of the Supreme Court.

The Court held that the Supreme Court's direction intended for a uniform 90-day period to be available from 01.03.2022.

Applying this to the facts, 90 days from 01.03.2022 expired on 29.05.2022. Since 28.05.2022 and 29.05.2022 were a Saturday and Sunday respectively, the filing of the appeal on the next working day, 30.05.2022, was deemed within time.

The High Court set aside the CESTAT order dismissing the appeal as time-barred. The appeal was restored to its original number and the Tribunal was directed to decide the matter on its merits.