9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... condone the delay on showing the sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the normal period of limitation. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Perumon Bhagvathy Devaswom v. Bhargavi Amma reported in 2008 (8) SCC 321 held that the words “sufficient cause for not making the application within the period of limitation” should be understood and applied in a reasonable, pragmatic, practic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are being taken up together. 3. Applicant filed these applications for condoning the delay of 277 days in filing the appeals. The applicants are engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Ingots, Rolled Products of Iron and Steel. In pursuance to the show cause notice the adjudicating authority passed the adjudication order on 19-3-2012. The contention of applicant is that the unit was closed in May, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed order and failed to inform the Management. The applicant also submitted that the applicants are willing to pay cost of Rs. 1 Lakh. 4. Revenue relied upon the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Balwant Singh v. Jagdish Singh reported in 2010 (262) E.L.T. 50 (S.C.) whereby Hon ble Supreme Court had not condoned the delay of 778 days in filing the application to bring legal heirs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e facts and circumstances of the case, and the type of case. The words sufficient cause in Section 5 of Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice, when the delay is not on account of any dilatory tactics, want of bona fides, deliberate inaction or negligence on the part of the appellant . 7. In the present case, vide the impugned order demand of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
