2019 (12) TMI 55 - HC - Service Tax

Condonation of delay of 1309 days in filing the appeal - Delay occurred as the appellant were unable to trace out the file and that they were not aware as to whether the second appeal has been filed before the Tribunal or not - sufficient reasons foe delay present or not - HELD THAT - There are no reason to disbelieve the explanation offered by the appellants in explaining the delay of 1309 days in filing the appeal - the reasoning of the Tribunal that the reasons assigned are neither logical and reasonable nor sufficient cause has been shown, cannot be accepted. It is needless to state that matters of delay require to be considered liberally on sufficient cause being shown. On considering the reasons assigned, it can be concluded that the reasons assigned constitutes sufficient case. Delay condoned - The application seeking condonation of delay is allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
Delay in filing appeal, Condonation of delay, Reasonable cause for delay

Analysis:
The judgment by the High Court of Karnataka involved an appeal filed against an order by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal rejecting an application seeking condonation of a 1309-day delay in filing the appeal. The reason for the delay provided was the resignation of the DGM (Taxation) who was working with the appellants, leading to the inability to trace the file and uncertainty about the filing of the second appeal before the Tribunal. The appellants contended that the delay should be condoned, and the appeal restored for consideration on merit.

Upon hearing the arguments, the Court found it necessary to interfere in the matter. The Court expressed its belief in the explanation provided by the appellants for the substantial delay in filing the appeal. It disagreed with the Tribunal's reasoning that the reasons given were not logical or reasonable, emphasizing the need to consider delays liberally when sufficient cause is shown. The Court concluded that the reasons presented by the appellants constituted a reasonable cause for the delay, warranting the condonation of the delay and the restoration of the appeal for consideration on its merits.

As a result of the Court's analysis, the appeal was allowed, and the order of the Tribunal rejecting the condonation of delay was set aside. The Court granted the application seeking condonation of delay, thereby condoning the delay in filing the appeal. The appeal was restored to the file, with directions for the Tribunal to consider the appeal on its merits. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering delays leniently when valid reasons are provided, ensuring that matters of delay are examined with a liberal perspective when sufficient cause is demonstrated.