2015 (7) TMI 1144 - AT - Central Excise

Condonation of delay - reasons for delay - Held that - It could not be explained by the learned advocate that when the authorized signatory was with the company after offering his resignation letter firstly on 01/09/2011 and was with the appellant company for another about over 3 months i.e. till 22/12/2011 why the company did not take over the relevant central excise files and papers from the said authorized signatory. This clearly shows that the appellant company has been completely negligent in managing their affairs and they were not bothered about their liability and obligations under the Central Excise laws. The learned advocate has not been able to satisfactorily explain and could not give substantial justification for this long delay of 10 months and 15 days in filing the appeal. Considering the facts and circumstances when there is no justifiable explanation for the long delay of 10 months and 15 days there is no option but to reject the appeal as time-barred under the provisions of Section 35B(3) of Central Excise Act 1944.

Summary

Issues: Condonation of delay in filing an appeal under Section 35B(3) of Central Excise Act, 1944

In this judgment, the appellant filed an application for condonation of delay of 10 months and 15 days in filing an appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 89 & 90/2011. The appellant argued that they were unaware of the order as the employee who received it had left the organization, and they only found out about it when recovery proceedings were initiated by the department. The authorized signatory who received the order had resigned from the company without handing over the files, and the company had also closed down the factory. The Tribunal noted that despite the authorized signatory being with the company for over three months after resigning, the company failed to take over the relevant central excise files and papers, indicating negligence in managing their affairs. The Tribunal found no justifiable explanation for the long delay and rejected the appeal as time-barred under Section 35B(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

The key issue in this case was whether the delay of 10 months and 15 days in filing the appeal against the Order-in-Appeal could be condoned under Section 35B(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant argued that they were unaware of the order due to the departure of the employee who received it and only learned about it when recovery proceedings were initiated. The Tribunal observed that the authorized signatory who received the order had resigned from the company without handing over the files, and the company had also closed down the factory. Despite the authorized signatory staying with the company for over three months after resigning, the company failed to take over the relevant central excise files and papers, indicating negligence in managing their affairs. The Tribunal found that there was no justifiable explanation for the long delay and rejected the appeal as time-barred under Section 35B(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.