2012 (6) TMI 367 - AT - Central Excise

Whether Commissioner should have condoned the delay of 3 days in filing the appeal without applications for condonation of delay, having been filed by the appellant - Held that - Matter is remanded to Commissioner (Appeals), who shall consider the appeals on merit in view of the fact that the delay is of 3 days only and the Commissioner should have given opportunity to the appellant before dismissing the appeal. In this case to avoid unnecessary litigation and in view of the fact that the matter was heard for quite some time on the issue of delay, the delay is being condoned and matter is being remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merit.

Summary

Issues involved: Condonation of delay in filing appeals without applications, opportunity for appellant to move for condonation of delay, remand for consideration on merit.

Analysis:
1. Condonation of Delay without Applications: The main issue in the appeals was whether the delay of 3 days in filing the appeal should have been condoned by the Commissioner without any applications for condonation of delay being filed by the appellant. The appellant argued that due to unforeseen circumstances, including heavy rain causing the office of the Commissioner to be closed, the appeal could not be submitted on time. The appellant relied on previous Tribunal decisions to support the contention that even oral applications should be considered sufficient and that the appellate authority should provide an opportunity to explain the delay instead of outright dismissal.

2. Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal, in considering the submissions made by the appellant, decided to remand the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a review on merit. The Tribunal acknowledged that the delay was only 3 days and that the Commissioner should have given the appellant an opportunity before dismissing the appeal. However, it was clarified that the Tribunal's previous decisions condoning delay without a formal application could not be directly applied in this case where the delay exceeded 1 day. Despite this, to avoid unnecessary litigation and considering the time already spent on the issue of delay, the Tribunal decided to condone the delay and remand the matter for a decision on merit by the Commissioner (Appeals).

3. Final Decision: Ultimately, the Tribunal's judgment emphasized the importance of providing a fair opportunity to the appellant in cases of delay in filing appeals. By remanding the matter for consideration on merit, the Tribunal sought to ensure that the appellant's case was not prejudiced due to the delay in filing the appeal. The decision to condone the delay and provide the appellant with a chance to have their appeal heard on its merits exemplifies the Tribunal's commitment to ensuring procedural fairness and access to justice in tax matters.