2013 (8) TMI 319 - AT - Customs

Condonation of delay stay application appeal was filed for condoning the delay of 534 days - Held that - The delay was of 534 days and there is no reason for details of long delay the contention of the applicant was not supported by any evidence - the applicant merely stated that she was not well and she was suffering from gynaecological disorder and also taking treatment in USA as her children were there - condonation of delay depend on the facts of each case and it is the duty of the applicant that they should explain the reason for delay in detail appeal and stay application rejected decided against the applicant.

Summary

Issues: Condonation of delay in filing appeals under Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
1. The applicant filed condonation applications for a delay of 534 days in both appeals. The matter was adjourned earlier at the request of the counsel, but on the day of hearing, no one appeared for the applicant, leading to the dismissal of both COD applications and the appeals along with stay applications.

2. The advocate later mentioned that he was delayed due to heavy traffic and requested consideration of the COD applications on merit. The applicant cited health issues, specifically gynaecological disorder, depression, and neurosis, as reasons for the delay, stating she was under continuous medical care, including treatment in the USA, and enclosed medical certificates as evidence.

3. The AR argued that the reasons given in the COD applications were not meritorious, highlighting that the applicant's firm was engaged in manufacturing activities with no genuine grounds for condonation of delay in filing the appeals.

4. The Tribunal considered Section 129A (3) and (5) of the Customs Act, 1962, which mandates filing appeals within three months from the date of the communicated order and allows for condonation of delay if sufficient cause is shown. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the applicant to provide detailed reasons for the delay.

5. After reviewing the records, the Tribunal found the applicant's explanation of health issues and treatment abroad insufficient to justify the 534-day delay. The lack of detailed reasons and supporting evidence led to the dismissal of the COD application, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal and stay application as well.

6. The judgment underscores that condonation of delay is case-specific and requires a thorough explanation from the applicant. In this instance, the Tribunal found the reasons provided inadequate and unsupported by evidence, leading to the rejection of the condonation application and subsequent dismissal of the appeal and stay application.