2005 (9) TMI 563 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in filing the appeal under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis:
The appeal in question was filed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) which was deemed time-barred due to a delay of 29 days in filing. The appellant received the impugned order on 9-9-2004 but filed the appeal on 7-11-2004, after 89 days, exceeding the statutory limit of 60 days as per Section 35 of the Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) had the authority to condone a delay of up to 30 days if sufficient cause was shown for the delay. The appellant's reason for the delay was that their counsel was preoccupied with other cases and could not prepare the appeal in time. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) was not convinced by this explanation and rejected the appeal as time-barred.

In the application for condonation of the delay, it was revealed that the counsel for the appellant resided elsewhere and could not prepare the appeal on time due to his involvement in other cases. The appellant had entrusted the matter to the counsel with clear instructions to file the appeal within the stipulated period. The appellant had no reason to doubt that the counsel would not file the appeal on time. The grounds presented by the appellant were considered to constitute a sufficient cause for the delay under sub-section (1) of Section 35. Consequently, the impugned order rejecting the appeal on the grounds of being time-barred was set aside, and the appeal was reinstated before the Commissioner (Appeals 1), Raipur, CG. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, rendering the stay application irrelevant in light of the decision. The judgment was pronounced in an open court setting.