9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (8) TMI 227X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or s order, the applicants approached the Central Board of Excise and Customs for warehousing the goods and as a special case the Central Board of Excise and Customs permitted storage of the goods under Section 49 of the Customs Act. Thereafter the appellants entrusted the documents to Shri K. Srinivasan (Consultant) and Shri Srinivasan was to prepare appeals during the first week of February 1987. But unfortunately on 26-1-1987 his mother suffered from a heart attack; therefore, he had to rush to Hyderabad. Shri Srinivasan further submitted that on 13-1-1987 the officers of the Directorate of Enforcement searched the office premises as well as the factory premises of the appellants and all the documents were taken possession of. The Chief ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... discretion should not be light-heartedly disturbed. In this connection Shri Pal placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1962 S.C. page 361. Shri Pal further submitted that the request to the enforcement agency for return of documents was made 17 days after the period of limitation. Shri Pal controverted Shri Srinivasan s submission that the customs did not return the Manual. In that connection Shri Pal pointed out that the letter dated 27-1-1987 and the receipt of the Manual by the appellant s representative. Shri Pal also submitted that in the month of February 1987 the appellants had written two letters to the collector and in none of these letters they have made any request for return of documents. Shri Pal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration of all the facts, we are unable to accept Shri Pal s contention that there is inaction and wanton delay on the part of the appellants. As has been laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Anantnag 1987 (28) E.L.T. 185, the Courts are required to take a very liberal approach in the matter of condonation of delay. The Court had cautioned that the liberal approach which the Supreme Court has been taking had not permeated to the lower authorities. The Court has also observed non-deliberate delay should not be made a ground to reject a substantial cause. Taking a pragmatic approach, we are satisfied that the delay was not deliberate. There was no culpable negligence or mala fide on the part of the applicants and as such, we a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
