2005 (2) TMI 372 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Delay in filing appeal by Revenue, authority to direct filing of appeal, interpretation of "sufficient cause" for condonation of delay.

Analysis:
The judgment deals with an application by the Revenue for condoning a delay of 41 days in filing an appeal. The Revenue argued that the delay was due to consulting the Chief Commissioner, citing a Supreme Court case that allows some latitude for delays caused by the State. On the other hand, the opposing party contended that only the Commissioner has the authority to direct the filing of an appeal, not the Chief Commissioner. They argued that the delay was impermissible as the impugned order had been accepted by the Commissioner before the appeal was filed. The opposing party relied on a decision stating that the Chief Commissioner cannot review an order passed by the Commissioner. The Revenue countered by stating that delays can occur during consultations within the Department and that the Commissioner can change his views. They referred to a decision emphasizing a liberal construction of "sufficient cause" in government-related delays.

The Tribunal considered both parties' submissions and noted that the delay in filing the appeal was only 41 days. While the Commissioner is authorized to direct the filing of an appeal under Section 35B, consulting with others in the Department is not prohibited. The Tribunal referenced a Supreme Court case emphasizing that litigants do not benefit from delays and that the judiciary aims to remove injustice. The Tribunal also highlighted that both the Supreme Court and the Karnataka High Court have allowed some latitude for delays in appeals filed by the State, as public interest is the ultimate concern in such cases. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to condone the delay in filing the appeal by the Revenue and scheduled the appeal for regular hearing on a specified date.