2012 (10) TMI 190 - HC - Central Excise

Condonation of delay of 579 days - Application is barred by Limitation involving tax amount of Rs.28 lakhs - Held that - It is true that the department acts on the basis of the action of the departmental officers. But there is a limit of inaction on the part of the departmental officials. Going by the apparent reading of the statements, it is hard to believe that the officials of the department would be inactive to such extent that has been projected in the application as because no document has been annexed supporting such statement. where the tax involvement is upto Rs.10 lakhs, no action shall be taken and for the balance amount of Rs.18 lakhs the proceeding ought not to be continued.

Summary

Issues:
Condonation of delay in filing the application.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an application for condonation of delay of approximately 579 days in a matter filed in 2004. The department failed to take any steps to bring the matter to the list initially. The court intervened to ensure proper handling of the case. The timeline of events leading to the delay was outlined, including adjournments on various dates. The senior advocate, Mr. Sen, returned the brief upon realizing the application was time-barred. The respondent's counsel, Mr. Roy Chowdhury, allegedly misplaced the brief papers. The explanation provided for the delay included claims of correspondence among departments, but lacked supporting documents.

The court expressed skepticism regarding the explanations offered for the delay, noting the absence of supporting documentation. The court highlighted the limit to departmental inaction, questioning the extent of claimed inactivity by department officials without documentary evidence. The involvement of a tax amount of Rs. 28 lakhs was mentioned, with the learned counsel arguing that no action should be taken for amounts up to Rs. 10 lakhs based on government decisions, suggesting discontinuation of proceedings for the remaining Rs. 18 lakhs.

In conclusion, the judgment delves into the intricacies of condonation of delay, scrutinizing the explanations provided and emphasizing the importance of supporting documentation. The court also considers the tax amount involved and relevant government decisions in determining the course of action.