2012 (9) TMI 705 - HC - Central Excise

Condonation of delay - delay of 42 days - Tribunal refused to condone the delay - Held that - Appellate Tribunal has taken a narrow view of the matter. An Appeal is a substantive right. The assessee should have a full opportunity to put forth his case and should be able to get relief if any in accordance with. - following the decision in Anantnag and Anr. v. Mst. Katiji and Ors. 1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME COURT delay condoned with cost of Rs. 5000/-

Summary

Issues:
Delay in filing appeal before Commissioner of Central Excise, refusal to condone the delay by Tribunal, imposition of costs on the assessee.

Analysis:
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, which was delayed by 42 days. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, citing unsatisfactory explanations for the delay provided by the assessee. The High Court referred to the case law of Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji to assess the delay issue. The Court opined that the Tribunal took a narrow view and emphasized that an appeal is a substantive right that allows the assessee to present their case fully. The Court considered the circumstances explained in the affidavit and decided to allow the appeal, setting aside the impugned order.

The Court acknowledged the difficulty in sustaining the assessee's negligence but also noted that the assessee should not be let off without consequences. Therefore, the Court imposed costs of Rs. 5,000 on the assessee. The judgment highlighted the importance of giving the assessee a fair opportunity to present their case and receive relief accordingly. The decision to allow the appeal and impose costs aimed to balance accountability for negligence with upholding the right to appeal and fair representation in legal proceedings.