2014 (1) TMI 1677 - AT - Central Excise

Condonation of delay - Held that - Appellants had received the Order in Original on or around 15.10.2012 but had not filed the appeal within time and there is a delay of 100 days in filing the appeal. The justification given by the appellants / applicants seems to be that the peon who received the Order in Original did not hand it over to the Managing Director and handed over the same belatedly and the Managing Director was suffering from Diabetes, Hypertension, and other old age related diseases and hence could not attend to the same. We find no evidence in support of such a claims made in the application nor there is any affidavit in support of such a claim. In the absence of any evidence to justify the delay in filing the appeal before the bench, we are unable to accept the grounds taken in the application for condonation of delay - Condonation denied.

Summary

Issues: Condonation of delay in filing appeal. Lack of evidence to justify delay. Dismissal of applications for condonation of delay, stay petitions, and appeals.

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD, the issue at hand involves two applications for condonation of delay in filing an appeal. The Tribunal notes that the applications were filed in April 2013, with a delay of 100 days in filing the appeal from the date the Order in Original was received around 15.10.2012. The appellants claimed that the delay was due to the peon not promptly delivering the order to the Managing Director, who was allegedly unwell. However, the Tribunal found no evidence or affidavit to support these claims, leading to a lack of justification for the delay. As a result, the Tribunal was unable to accept the grounds presented in the application for condonation of delay, ultimately dismissing the applications for condonation of delay. Consequently, the stay petitions and appeals were also dismissed by the Tribunal.

This judgment emphasizes the importance of providing concrete evidence to substantiate claims when seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals. The lack of supporting evidence or affidavits can hinder the acceptance of grounds for delay, leading to the dismissal of applications for condonation of delay. It highlights the need for parties to diligently adhere to procedural timelines and provide verifiable reasons for any delays encountered in legal proceedings to ensure a fair and just determination by the Tribunal.