2017 (6) TMI 893 - AT - Central Excise

Maintainability of appeal - time limitation - condonation of delay - power of Commissioner (A) to condone delay - there is a delay of more than 3 years - appeal was filed wrongly before inappropriate forum - Held that - appellant has wrongly filed the appeal before the Office of the Commissioner instead of before the Office of the Commissioner (A) and that was a bona fide mistake and the Department should have returned the appeal to the assessee for filing the same before the right forum but the same was not done by the department and therefore, the time spent in pursuing appeal before a wrong forum is condonable and the delay is condoned - the present appeal is very much within the condonable limit of the Commissioner (A) - appeal restored - the case remanded back to the Commissioner (A) to decide the same on merits - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
- Condonation of delay in filing an appeal before the Commissioner (A).
- Interpretation of Section 35(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
- Bona fide mistake leading to appeal filed before the wrong forum.
- Applicability of case laws in condoning delay.

Analysis:

The appeal in question was filed against an order passed by the Commissioner (A) dismissing the application seeking condonation of delay, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal as barred by limitation. The appellants, engaged in manufacturing excisable goods, filed the appeal with the Commissioner (A) on 29.3.2016 against an Order-in-Original dated 8.10.2012. The delay in filing the appeal was attributed to the appeal being wrongly filed at the wrong Commissionerate initially. The Commissioner (A) held that they lacked the power to condone the delay beyond 30 days, and since the delay exceeded 3 years, the application for condonation was rejected along with the appeal.

The appellant argued that the rejection of the appeal as time-barred was not legally sustainable. They contended that the appeal was addressed to the correct forum but filed at the wrong office due to inadvertent human error. The appellant claimed they did not receive any notice from the correct office and believed the appeal was pending before the Commissioner (A). Citing precedents, the appellant argued that time spent before the wrong forum should be excluded for calculating limitation. They also emphasized the merit of their case and the potential irreparable loss if the delay was not condoned.

Upon hearing both parties and reviewing the records, the Tribunal found that the appeal was indeed filed at the wrong office due to a bona fide mistake. The Tribunal held that the time spent pursuing the appeal before the wrong forum was condonable. Consequently, the delay was condoned, bringing the appeal within the permissible limit. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case back to the Commissioner (A) for a decision on merits.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision centered on the bona fide nature of the mistake leading to the appeal being filed at the wrong forum, the interpretation of Section 35(1) of the Central Excise Act, and the application of relevant case laws in condoning the delay. The ruling highlighted the importance of ensuring that procedural errors do not unduly prejudice parties and emphasized the need for a just and equitable approach in such matters.