9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 770 - AT - Central ExciseCondonation of delay for more than seven years - HELD THAT - As the impugned order has been passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in 2011 and received by the appellant in 2011 itself and the same has not been brought in the knowledge of the Hon ble High Court - As no appeal was pending against the impugned order, therefore, we are unable to entertain the applications for condonation of delay filed by the appellant which are highly time barred, therefore, the applications for condonation of delay are dismissed. Application for condonation of delay is dismissed - appeal dismissed.
Issues:
Delay in filing appeals, condonation of delay, dismissal of appeals. Analysis: The appellant filed appeals with applications for condonation of delay exceeding seven years. The appellant had initially filed a Writ Petition in the High Court challenging a stay order by the Commissioner (Appeals). However, as the Writ Petition remained pending since 2011 without a stay order, the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal in 2011. Subsequently, the High Court observed the Writ Petition as infractuous due to the absence of a stay order and dismissed it in 2018. The appellant then filed the current appeals after the dismissal of the Writ Petition seeking condonation of delay. The appellant argued that the delay was due to the failure of the Counsel handling the Writ Petition to bring the Commissioner's order to the High Court's notice. The appellant cited a Supreme Court decision to support the contention that the appellant should not suffer due to the Counsel's fault. The Tribunal noted that the impugned order by the Commissioner (Appeals) was passed in 2011 and received by the appellant in the same year, but it was not brought to the High Court's knowledge. The High Court, in its order, mentioned that the appellant could seek revival of the Writ Petition if the appeal was pending. However, since no appeal was pending against the impugned order, the Tribunal found the applications for condonation of delay to be highly time-barred and dismissed them. Consequently, the appeals were also dismissed, with the appellant advised to seek appropriate remedy before the suitable forum.
|
