Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1991 (3) TMI 236

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... with applications for condonation of delay on 4-2-1991. In column No. 3 of the appeal memo the date of communication has been mentioned as 17-9-1990. In terms of provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 35B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, an appeal has to be filed within 3 months from the date of communication of the order on the appellants. Thus the last date for the filing of the appeal was on or before the 17-12-1990. Thus there is a delay of 48 days. Shri M. S. Arora, learned JDR has appeared on behalf of the applicants. He has pleaded that the appellants were prevented by sufficient cause in late filing of the appeals. He has argued that there were riots in Ahmedabad and as such the appeals could not be filed within the stip .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e of Collector of Customs v. Hindustan Motors Ltd., reported in 1991 (51) E.L.T. 400 where the Tribunal had taken into consideration all the aspects of the matter. Shri J.S. Aggarwal, learned Advocate stated that it is settled law that after the expiry of the limitation the appellant has to explain each and every day s delay. He fairly stated that upto the last date of the limitation the appellant is not to explain delay and upto 23-12-1990 the offices of the Collector were closed and that can be sufficient ground upto that date or maximum 1 week should have been considered for the purpose of the filing of the appeals in respect of drafting etc. Shri J. S. Aggarwal stated that in the matter before the Tribunal there is a delay of 48 days an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e, curfew was imposed in the city. This office was also covered under curfew and therefore office was remained closed upto 23-12-1990. The authorisation of the Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad is issued on 13-12-1990 but the same is received by this office on 17-12-1990, due to above reason. In this connection, regarding documentary evidence, I submit herewith a certificate issued by Police Inspector, Karanj Police Station, Ahmedabad City." We have also looked into the certificate issued by Police Inspector. The certificate is also reproduced below :- This is to certify that Nirmal Building in which the Central Excise offices are situated are just opposite to our Police Chowky. This office area was under curfew and communal distu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the decree as binding between the parties and this legal right which has accrued to the decree holder by lapse of time should not be light heartedly disturbed. The other consideration which cannot be ignored is that if sufficient cause for excusing delay is shown discretion is given to the Court to condone delay and admit the appeal. 6. Earlier in the case of State of West Bengal v. The Administrator, Howrah Municipality, reported in AIR 1972 SC 749, Hon ble Supreme Court had held that mere fact that the appellant is state, no special treatment should be accorded to the appellants. Para No. 27 from the said judgment is reproduced below :- the expression sufficient cause" cannot be construed too liberally, merely because the party in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... it case to exercise our discretion in condoning the delay in the terms of provisions of sub-section (5) of Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962. Accordingly, the above captioned 3 applications for condonation of delay for rejected." We are in full agreement with earlier view of the Tribunal as discussed above. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that these are .not fit cases where the Tribunal should exercise its discretion in terms of provisions of sub-section (5) of Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962. Accordingly, the above captioned 12 applications for condonation of delay are rejected. 4. Since we have rejected the applications for condonation of delay in the above captione .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates