9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (7) TMI 1225 - AT - Central ExciseCondonation of delay - Prayer for adjournment - adjournment sought on the ground that their advocate is out of station - Held that - Since there is a delay of 16 years in filing the appeals before the first appellate authority, who has no power to condone the delay beyond 30 days, after the statutory period of 60 days in filing the appeal, I find anything wrong in the orders passed by the first appellate authority - The impugned orders are correct and legal and do not suffer from any infirmity - appeal dismissed.
Issues: Delay in filing appeals before the first appellate authority.
In the judgment delivered by Mr. M.V.RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT HYDERABAD, the issue at hand was the delay in filing appeals before the first appellate authority. The appellant failed to appear in court despite seeking adjournment due to their advocate being out of station. The records revealed a history of adjournment requests by the appellant on previous dates. The appeals were filed before the lower authorities on 26/05/2015, while the Order-in-Original was received on 29/01/1999, indicating a significant delay of 16 years. The first appellate authority lacked the power to condone the delay beyond 30 days after the statutory period of 60 days for filing the appeal. Consequently, the orders passed by the first appellate authority were deemed appropriate due to the unjustified delay in filing the appeals. The judgment emphasized that the impugned orders were legally sound and free from any defects. It was concluded that no intervention was necessary in such orders, as they were deemed correct and valid. The dismissal of the appeals was justified based on the delay in filing and the lack of justifiable reasons provided for the belated submission of appeals before the first appellate authority. The decision was made after careful consideration of the records and the history of adjournment requests by the appellant, ultimately leading to the affirmation of the first appellate authority's orders.
|
