2018 (6) TMI 997 - HC - Central Excise

Rectification of Mistake application - Application for condonation of delay was filed. This application was dismissed by the Tribunal by an order dated 16.09.2005 holding that proper explanation for delay has not been given. This order was passed in absence of the representatives of the company - Held that - The appellants could have at least brought these facts to the notice of this Court for out of turn hearing. No such attempt was made. After more than a decade now we would be remanding the proceedings before the Tribunal for fresh decision on merits which should have happened in the first instance and in any case, would have been the order passed by the Court if the appellant had been vigilant enough to press the appeal for early hearing - Delay caused in filing appeal before the Tribunal is condoned - appeal to be heard on merits.

Issues involved:
Appeal dismissal due to delay in filing, condonation of delay application rejection by Tribunal, need for a reasonable and liberal approach in condoning delay, delay in bringing facts to the notice of the Court, setting aside the Tribunal's order, expeditious hearing by the Tribunal.

Issue 1: Appeal dismissal due to delay in filing

The manufacturer filed an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal) which was dismissed on the ground of a delay of about 70 days. The Tribunal rejected the application for condonation of delay, citing the lack of a proper explanation for the delay. The company then filed an application for rectification, which was also dismissed, leading to the filing of the current appeal before the High Court.

Issue 2: Condonation of delay application rejection by Tribunal

The High Court noted that the company's application seeking condonation of delay presented unfortunate facts. The company explained that the delay was due to the departure of the individual responsible for legal matters in September 2004, and the awareness of the appellate order against the company only in July 2005. Despite emphasizing the requirement of a reasonable and liberal approach in condoning delays, the Tribunal dismissed the application without discussion. The High Court expressed disappointment over the Tribunal's handling of the matter and highlighted the need for a fair consideration of explanations for delays.

Issue 3: Need for a reasonable and liberal approach in condoning delay

The High Court underscored the importance of a reasonable and liberal approach in condoning delays, especially when the delay is not significant and the explanation provided is reasonable. Emphasizing the tragic nature of the delay in the case at hand, spanning nearly 12 years, the Court criticized the lack of vigilance on the part of the appellants in pursuing an early hearing. Despite the delay, the Court recognized the merits of the case in favor of the company, supported by judgments of the Tribunal and even the Supreme Court. The Court highlighted the potential destruction of a meritorious case due to delay and the passage of time.

Issue 4: Delay in bringing facts to the notice of the Court

The High Court lamented the fact that the Tax Appeal remained pending for over a decade without any attempt by the appellants to expedite the proceedings or bring the matter to the Court's attention for an out-of-turn hearing. The Court indicated that the appellants could have sought an early hearing if they had been vigilant. Despite the delay, the Court set aside the Tribunal's order, condoned the delay in filing the appeal, and directed the Tribunal to hear the appeal on merits expeditiously.

In conclusion, the High Court's judgment addressed the dismissal of the appeal due to a delay in filing, the rejection of the condonation of delay application by the Tribunal, the necessity of a reasonable and liberal approach in condoning delays, the delay in bringing facts to the Court's notice, and the directive for expeditious hearing by the Tribunal. The Court highlighted the tragic consequences of delays in legal proceedings and stressed the importance of timely action and diligence in pursuing legal remedies.

← Previous Next →