2001 (10) TMI 393 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal for condonation of delay of 24 days beyond six months period under Notfn. No. 41/94-C.E. (N.T.), dt. 22-9-1994.

Analysis:
The appellant, represented by Shri C.D. Banga, sought condonation of a 24-day delay beyond the prescribed six-month period under a specific notification. The appellant, a manufacturer based in Faridabad, exported goods through a merchant exporter in Ludhiana, emphasizing they had no control over the exporter as they were not a regular customer. The appellant highlighted that there was no dispute regarding the export of goods and their identity. Reference was made to a similar case before the Tribunal where a delay was condoned based on specific circumstances and the nominal nature of the delay. The appellant argued that the delay was reasonable and should be condoned.

The respondent, represented by Shri A.S. Bedi, contended that although there was provision for extending the time limit beyond six months for claiming duty rebate, the delay needed to be satisfactorily explained. The respondent argued that the appellant's explanation regarding lack of control over the merchant exporter was not satisfactory. As a result, the authorities had rightfully denied the benefit without extending the time limit. The respondent urged the court to uphold the impugned order.

After hearing both parties, the judge carefully considered the submissions. It was noted that there was no dispute about the identity of the exported goods, which were cleared from the manufacturer's factory under specific documentation. Despite a 24-day delay in export, the goods were ultimately exported, and duty had been paid. The judge acknowledged the provision for extending the export period beyond six months and found the delay in this case to be reasonable, especially considering the appellant's lack of control over the merchant exporter. The judge deemed the delay condonable, emphasizing that it was not inordinate and granted the appeal. Any consequential relief was to be provided to the appellants as per the law.