2014 (4) TMI 912 - HC - Central Excise

Condonation of delay - Held that - On perusal of averments made in the application, it reveals that it is a case of negligence and latches on the part of the office of the Union of India and on the part of the office of Assistant Commissioner as well. The limitation for filing appeal is 180 days, which is quite sufficient. It is unfortunate that during the aforesaid period, the appeal could not be properly prepared and filed. The reason given in the application are not supported by any documents and affidavit. Therefore, the same cannot be accepted. - In paragraph 6 of the application it is stated that appeal was presented before the Registry on 20.02.2006, which is wrong. In fact, on 20.02.2006, it was got reported by the Stamp Reporter and has been presented on 06.03.2006. There is no explanation for further delay from 20.02.2006 to 06.03.2006 - Condonation denied.

Summary

Issues: Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal, Negligence and Laches in Preparing Appeal, Lack of Affidavit Supporting Delay Condonation Application

Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal:
The appeal filed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise against the Tribunal's order dated 29.04.2005 was dismissed for want of prosecution on 17.11.2009 due to the absence of an affidavit supporting the application for condonation of delay. Despite multiple restoration applications, the affidavit was not filed, leading to subsequent dismissals. The Court declined to grant further indulgence as no affidavit was submitted even after being given additional time. The application was rejected based on the lack of supported reasons for the delay and negligence in preparing the appeal.

Negligence and Laches in Preparing Appeal:
The Court observed negligence and laches on the part of the Union of India's office and the Assistant Commissioner's office in preparing and filing the appeal within the statutory 180-day limitation period. The application's reasons for delay were deemed insufficient and unsupported by any documents or affidavit, leading to the rejection of the condonation of delay. The incorrect statement in the application regarding the appeal's presentation date further contributed to the Court's decision to decline condonation.

Lack of Affidavit Supporting Delay Condonation Application:
Despite repeated opportunities and extensions granted to file an affidavit supporting the delay condonation application, the appellant failed to comply. The Court emphasized the necessity of an affidavit to substantiate the reasons for delay, which was lacking in this case. The absence of a supported affidavit, coupled with the failure to provide valid justifications for the delay, resulted in the rejection of the condonation application.