Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2015 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 744 - HC - Central ExciseCondonation of delay in appeal- Sufficient reason for delay- Held that:- The application seeking condonation of delay mentions that there was a vacancy in the office of the concerned legal officer and that is why the delay occurred. Before the Tribunal, it appears that the argument proceeded on the vacancy in the department of Finance and Accounts and particularly of the level of Manager. That Government departments and particularly on account of outsourcing of several functions are working with depleted staff strength. Similar is the position of the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited. Though the original Board has been divided and on functional lines, limited company has been established, yet, full staff strength has not been achieved. Similarly, in matters of taxation and particularly in Service Tax, there was somebody who could have applied his mind jointly with the legal department. The Finance and Accounts Manager is a crucial post. Its vacancy during the relevant period was, in the given facts and circumstances, a vital element and factor. It is not as if the reason was found to be false or the Appellant was totally negligent and callous or has ignored the legal proceedings completely. In such circumstances, by imposition of costs, the discretion could have been exercised in favour of a statutory entity and authority like the Appellant before us. In the light of the above discussion, we proceed to condone the delay in filing of the statutory Appeals on condition that the Appellant/original Applicant in both Appeals before us shall deposit costs quantified at ₹ 25 ,000 /-. The costs quantified in both Appeals shall be paid to the Respondent within a period of 4 weeks from today.On the proof of the costs deposited being produced, the Tribunal shall restore the Appeals and the stay applications to its file. Decided conditionally in favour of appellant.
|