2013 (7) TMI 677 - AT - Central Excise

Condonation of delay - Penalty u/s 11AC - Commissioner dismisses appeal for delay - Held that - Commissioner (Appeals) has no power to condone the delay beyond 30 days in addition to a statutory period of sixty days in filing the Appeal - Following decision of SINGH ENTERPRISES Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAMSHEDPUR 2007 (12) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Waiver of penalty under Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Delayed filing of appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) and the power of Commissioner (Appeals) to condone the delay.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an application filed for the waiver of a penalty of Rs.2,02,497 imposed on the applicant under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The applicant had failed to discharge the additional Customs Duty on their DTA clearances, leading to the penalty imposition after paying the due amount along with interest. The appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) who dismissed it due to delayed filing.

The applicant argued that the delay in filing the appeal was due to the concerned person handling the matter leaving the organization. They sought condonation of the delay, which was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Revenue contended that the Commissioner (Appeals) lacked the power to condone the delay, citing the case of Singh Enterprises Vs. Commr. of Central Excise, Jamshedpur.

Upon hearing both sides and reviewing the records, the judge noted a delay of about 3 months in filing the appeal from the due date. The Commissioner (Appeals) had received the order-in-original on 07.12.2009 but filed the appeal on 18.05.2010. The judge referred to Section 35(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which allows for a 60-day period to file an appeal with a further 30-day extension if sufficient cause is shown. Citing the case of Singh Enterprises, the judge emphasized that the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot condone the delay beyond the statutory period.

Consequently, the judge found no merit in the appeal due to the delay in filing and dismissed it. The requirement of pre-deposit of the dues adjudged was dispensed with, and the appeal was rejected. The stay petition was also disposed of during the proceedings. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court on 28/06/13.