9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Condonation of delay in filing appeals, waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery
In the judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, the issues revolved around two sets of applications filed by the appellants. The first set sought Condonation of Delay of the appeals, while the second set requested waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery concerning the dues adjudged against the appellants. The appellants received copies of the impugned order on 29th September, 2008, and filed the appeals on 28-1-2009, with a delay of approximately 30 days. They claimed that they had forwarded the signed copies of the appeal memorandum and stay applications to their Consultant on 22-12-2008. However, it was revealed that there was a significant delay on their part in acting upon the impugned order. The Clerical Assistant in the Consultant's office, who received the documents, failed to file the appeal with the Tribunal and did not hand over the papers to the Consultant upon quitting the job. The appellants' submissions lacked necessary particulars, as the Clerical Assistant was not named, the date of resignation was not mentioned, and there was no accompanying affidavit from the Clerical Assistant. Consequently, the Tribunal found that sufficient cause for condonation of delay had not been demonstrated. As a result, the Delay Condonation Applications were dismissed, leading to the dismissal of the appeals as time-barred. Additionally, the stay applications were also dismissed. In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision highlighted the importance of demonstrating sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing appeals. The judgment emphasized the need for accuracy and completeness in submissions, including providing necessary particulars and supporting documentation. Failure to meet these requirements could result in the dismissal of appeals as time-barred, as evidenced in this case.
|
