2005 (10) TMI 466 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Delay in filing appeal, condonation of delay

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, CHENNAI, the issue at hand was the condonation of a delay of 269 days in filing an appeal. The impugned order was received by the assessee on 10-8-2003, but the appeal was filed on 6-8-2004, leading to the delay in question. The reasons for the delay were explained in an affidavit by the Executive Director of the company. It was claimed that the person handling Central Excise matters had been in an accident in September 2003, leading to prolonged treatment. The individual only resumed official duties in July 2004. Additionally, a temporary employee who was handling the matters during the absence of the injured person had quit without notice in October 2003. However, the Tribunal found the explanation provided by the Executive Director to be unconvincing. A certificate from a doctor was produced to support the claim of the injured employee's inability to work, but it did not mention the employee's name, rendering it ineffective. The Tribunal expressed surprise that a manufacturing company did not have a substitute for an employee handling Central Excise matters during the period in question, deeming the explanation unbelievable. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application for condonation of delay, leading to the dismissal of the appeal as time-barred.