9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (11) TMI 238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent. [Order per : Harish Chander, Member (J)]. - Collector of Customs (Madras) has filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras. The said appeal was received in the Registry on the 3rd day of December, 1984 and in Column No. 3, the date of communication has been mentioned as 4th August, 1984. An application for Condonation of Delay wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted in 'Judgement Today' 1990 (3) SC 704, where there was a delay of 1198 days and there was no material on record indicating due diligence in working out the remedies and there was no proper affidavit either of the appellant or of the Counsel. He has pleaded for the rejection of the condonation of delay. 3. We have heard both the sides and have gone through the facts and circumstances of the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The appeal has been thereafter prepared and is now being filed. It is therefore prayed that CEGAT may please condone the delay in filing the appeal and admit the same." A simple perusal of the same shows that the delay occurred due to inter departmental communication. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI v. M/s. Tata Yodogawa Ltd. reported in 1988 (38) E.L.T. 739 (SC) has held that "Appeal b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idavit of either the appellants or the counsel in support of the application for condonation of delay. There is also no other material to indicate that the appellants had exercised due diligence in working out their remedies and sought proper advice in the matter. When the party had no right of appeal, the proceedings instituted before the High Court challenging the judgment in the Writ Petition c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the view that there was negligence on the part of the appellant in the filing of the appeal and the appellant was not prevented by sufficient cause in the late filing of the appeal. The appellants' request for condonation of delay is rejected. 4. Since we have rejected the application for condonation of delay, the appeal is also dismissed being hit by limitation and we are not going into the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
