Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2013 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (8) TMI 226 - HC - Central ExciseCondonation of delay in filing appeal before Commissioner(A) - Adjudicating authority which sanctioned the refund amount on the first show-cause notice, issued a fresh show cause notice on the ground that the refund was erroneously granted - After awarding the opportunity of hearing, it confirmed the recovery of refund amount of Rs. 4 lakhs vide its impugned order dated 23.2.2009 - The petitioner herein challenged the same before the Commissioner(Appeals) raising various grounds in such challenge. Such appeal was preferred on 3.8.2009 i.e. five months after the order impugned was passed - Commissioner(Appeals) rejected the condonation of delay application and held that it does not enjoy the powers to condone delay beyond a period of 30 days – Subsequenty, Tribunal confirmed the order of Commissioner(A) and rejected the condonation of delay application – Held that:- There is no quarrel that the power of Commissioner(Appeals) to condone the delay is of three months maximum. And, therefore, no fault can be found with the approach of both the authorities as far as question of condonation of delay is concerned. None of these authorities has decided the question on merit after the second round of litigation began – As per decision of D.R. Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [2008 (3) TMI 213 - HIGH COURT GUJARAT ] held that this Court has extraordinary powers in appropriate case to interfere even while upholding the contention that there is statutory limitation to which delay can be condoned by the authorities. In Senior Superintendent of Post Office v. Union of India [2012 (6) TMI 271 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ], this court recognised that if an aggrieved person knocks the door of High Court seeking redressal under writ jurisdiction for valid reasons, to obviate extraordinary hardship and injustice such challenge can be entertained even beyond the period of limitation – Refund allowed – Decided in favor of Assessee.
|