2014 (7) TMI 844 - HC - Customs

Condonation of delay - sufficient cause - delay of more than tree years - review section of the department sought copy of order from CESTAT - tribunal took about one year to supply certified copy of the order - Held that - the explanation afforded in the memorandum of appeal, in the extracts of the pleadings reproduced above, hardly can be stated to constitute sufficient cause . Even if one accepts the earliest point of time when the knowledge of the impugned order was derived by the revenue, the explanation for further delay of more than one year ten months is not adequate. - appeal dismissed as belated and time barred - decided against the revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order of Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal.

Challenge to Order of Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal:
The judgment challenges an order of the Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 03.03.2011. The appeal is considered highly belated, being filed more than three years after the said order. The Appellant explains in the Memorandum of Appeal that despite the order being issued in 2011, it faced delays due to queries from the Refund Section by the Revenue Branch regarding the acceptance of the order by the Department. The Appellant requested the CESTAT order multiple times, with the attested copy finally being received on 7.10.2013. The issue before the Court revolves around the delay in filing the appeal and the sufficiency of the reasons provided for the delay.

Condonation of Delay in Re-filing the Appeal:
The application before the Court seeks condonation of a delay of 121 days in re-filing the appeal. The Appellant's counsel argues that the Registry of the Court did not request an application for condonation of delay. However, the Court opines that the explanation provided in the memorandum of appeal does not constitute "sufficient cause" for the delay. Despite acknowledging the time taken for the revenue to become aware of the impugned order, the Court deems the further delay of over one year and ten months as inadequate. Consequently, the Court dismisses the appeal as belated and time-barred.

In summary, the judgment addresses the challenges to the order of the Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal and the request for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal. The Court scrutinizes the reasons for the delay provided by the Appellant and concludes that the explanation offered does not meet the threshold of constituting "sufficient cause" for the extended delay in filing the appeal. As a result, the appeal is dismissed on grounds of being belated and time-barred.