2001 (9) TMI 597 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal dismissed on the ground of time-bar without affording an opportunity for explanation.
2. Lack of application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
3. Violation of principles of natural justice by the Commissioner (Appeals).

Analysis:
1. The appeal in question was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) solely on the basis that it was barred by limitation, without delving into the merits of the case or providing the appellants with a chance for a personal hearing. The order from the adjudicating authority was received by the appellants on 20-12-2000, and the appeal was filed on 21-3-2001. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal without granting a hearing, alleging that the appellants had misstated the date of receipt. The appellants argued that the order reached the relevant department on 29-12-2000, leading to the appeal being filed within the prescribed time. The Tribunal noted that the question of delay was a factual matter requiring an explanation from the appellants, which was not provided by the Commissioner (Appeals). It was held that the Commissioner should have followed the principles of natural justice by issuing a show-cause notice before rejecting the appeal based on time-bar, leading to the order being set aside as violative of natural justice.

2. The absence of an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal was highlighted during the proceedings. While acknowledging the necessity for such an application, the Tribunal emphasized that the lack of this application did not empower the Commissioner (Appeals) to dismiss the appeal on the grounds of time-bar without granting the appellants an opportunity to present their case. The Tribunal clarified that the Commissioner should have provided a chance for the appellants to explain any delay in filing the appeal, as required by the principles of natural justice.

3. The Tribunal concluded that the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) was in exercise of quasi-judicial power and, therefore, should have adhered to the principles of natural justice. It was emphasized that before rejecting an appeal on the grounds of being time-barred, the Commissioner should have issued a show-cause notice to the appellants, allowing them to provide an explanation. Since this procedural requirement was not met, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and directed the Commissioner (Appeals) to reconsider the appeal in accordance with the law, ensuring that the appellants are given a fair opportunity to explain any delay in filing the appeal.