2008 (2) TMI 390 - AT - Central Excise

Delay in filing the appeal - appellant s factory was sealed by the Customs impugned order was served upon the appellant by fixing the same on the outside of the factory premises - it is the appellant s case that the entire documents were lying inside the factory, thus making and filing the appeal was impossible for them - It is also on record that Director of the appellant was under detention during the period - late filing of the appeal is not on account of any lapse on the part of the appellant - COD applications allowed

Summary

Issues: Delay in filing appeal due to factory seal by Customs and CBI, detention of director, sufficiency of cause for late filing.

In the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD, the delay in filing the appeal, which was around one year and ten months, was discussed. The impugned order was passed on 30th July, 2005, and the appellant's factory was sealed by Customs officers on 22-2-2005. The order was served by fixing it outside the factory premises. The last date for filing the appeal was 22nd of December, 2005, but the appeal was filed in October 2007. The factory remained under seal until 27th of July, 2006, when it was sealed again by CBI. The appellant claimed that despite no recovery during the search and issuance of a 'nil' recovery panchanama, the factory remained sealed, hindering access to necessary documents for filing the appeal. Furthermore, the director of the appellant was in detention from January 2007 to August 2007. Upon his release, he requested photocopies of the documents from Revenue and filed the appeal thereafter.

The Tribunal noted that the late filing of the appeal was not due to any fault of the appellant. The circumstances, including the prolonged seal on the factory, the director's detention, and the unavailability of essential documents, were deemed to constitute sufficient cause for the delay. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the COD applications and scheduled the stay petitions for 24-3-2008. The judgment was delivered by Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (J), and Shri M. Veeraiyan, Member (T), emphasizing the importance of the circumstances leading to the delay in filing the appeal and the necessity of considering such factors in determining the sufficiency of cause for late submissions.