2017 (1) TMI 531 - AT - Central Excise

Condonation of delay - delay of 26 days beyond the period of 60 days and 22 days in other appeal in filing appeal - Held that - reliance placed in the decision of the case of Affiliated Computer Services (I) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CST, Bangalore 2012 (9) TMI 705 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT wherein the Hon ble Karnataka High Court condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The reason for delay in this case was that the recipient of the order in one department had not been communicated to the legal department of the company. However, the Hon ble Karnataka High Court allowed the appeal on the ground that appeal is a substantive right and narrow view should not be taken to dismiss the appeal - by taking a liberal approach, I am of the considered view that the delay in filing the appeal before learned Commissioner (A) was not intentional and deliberate and therefore, I condone the delay in filing the appeal - delay condoned - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against order dismissing appeals on the ground of limitation without considering merits.

Analysis:
The appellant, a 100% EOU manufacturing plastic processing machines, held a private bonded warehouse license and sought de-bonding of indigenous capital goods and raw materials. The Department observed expiry of bond period for two CNW vertical machines and issued a show-cause notice for demanding interest and penalty. The Assistant Commissioner allowed clearance on payment of duty with interest and penalty. The appeals filed by the appellant were rejected by the Commissioner (A) on the ground of limitation, with delays of 26 days and 22 days in filing. The appellant argued that the delay was unintentional due to the Director being on tour and should have been condoned. Citing a Karnataka High Court decision, the appellant emphasized that delay should be condoned as appeal is a substantive right. The Tribunal, adopting a liberal approach, held that the delay was not deliberate, condoned it, set aside the impugned order, and directed the Commissioner (A) to decide the appeal on merits after providing a hearing and opportunity to produce documents.

This judgment highlights the importance of considering the circumstances leading to a delay in filing appeals and the need for a liberal approach in condoning such delays. The Tribunal emphasized that appeal is a substantive right and delays should not result in dismissal without considering the merits of the case. By setting aside the order based on limitation and directing a fresh consideration on merits, the Tribunal ensured that the appellant's rights were protected and that justice was served. The decision also underscores the significance of providing opportunities for parties to present their case and produce relevant documents before reaching a final decision. Overall, the judgment reflects a fair and just approach in dealing with procedural issues like delays in filing appeals, ensuring that substantive rights are upheld and parties are given a chance to present their case effectively before the authorities.