2008 (12) TMI 409 - AT - Central Excise

Condonation of delay - in filing of appeal - appeal has been filed after 60 days delay - two Commissioners constituting the Committee are located at different places, they could not meet in time for taking the decision - Held that - only reason given for 60 day s delay in filing the appeal - Committee of Commissioners for filing the appeal comprises of Commissioner are located at different places - are not so far away that the Commissioners cannot meet in time for this important function - Appeal is dismissed

Summary

Issues: Delay in filing appeal, Condonation of delay, Stay of order

Delay in filing appeal:
The case involved an application by the Revenue for condonation of delay in filing an appeal and for a stay of the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order. The impugned order-in-appeal was received on 16-5-08, and the appeal was filed on 16-10-08 after a 60-day delay. The Departmental Representative cited that the Committee of Commissioners for authorizing the appeal could not meet in time due to the Commissioners being located at different places. The Advocate for the respondent argued that apart from the geographical separation of the Commissioners, no valid reason was provided for the delay in filing the appeal.

Condonation of delay:
The Tribunal carefully considered the submissions from both sides and reviewed the records. It was noted that the only reason given for the delay was the geographical separation of the Commissioners at Raipur and Nagpur. The Tribunal found this reason insufficient as Raipur and Nagpur were not too far apart to prevent the Commissioners from meeting in time for such an important function. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied with the reasons provided by the Revenue for the delay and dismissed the application for condonation of delay, along with the appeal.

Stay of order:
The judgment did not specifically address the issue of a stay of the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order, as the focus was primarily on the delay in filing the appeal and the subsequent request for condonation of the delay. The Tribunal's decision to dismiss the application for condonation of delay implied that the appeal would not be entertained, potentially impacting the status of the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order.

This judgment highlights the importance of providing valid and sufficient reasons for seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals, emphasizing that mere geographical separation of decision-makers may not always be considered a justifiable cause.