TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (12) TMI 208
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the appeal herein holding that they are eligible for modvat benefit in respect of the plastic holders as inputs for the transfusion bottles manufactured by them taking note of the fact that the cost of such holders is included in the value of the bottles cleared by them on payment of duty. The date of receipt of the copy of the order appealed against was 15-3-90 and the appeal has been received in the Registry of the Tribunal on 3-7-90. The delay beyond the due date for filing the appeal is thus seventeen days. In the condonation of delay application the reason for the delay has been explained as follows. "13-6-90 After doing the preliminaries in regard to examination and review over the subject order in appeal, the file was finally pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, 1987 (28) E.L.T. 185 (S.C.) and of the Delhi High Court in the case of Indian Telephone Industries v. Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, reported in 1987 (32) E.L.T. 651, (Delhi). These cases took note of the fact that the processing of files in Government offices take more time because of the different stages involved. The delay in this case was not deliberate or due to any negligence. The delay is only of 17 days and has occurred despite due deligence in handling the work. He pleaded that the delay may be condoned and the appeal heard on merits. 3. The arguments were opposed by the learned counsel, Shri R.N. Bajoria and Shri J.P. Khaitan appearing on behalf of the respondents. Shri Bajoria submitted that the date cha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mical Works, 1986 (26) E.L.T. 151 a delay of 12 days in filing the appeal was not condoned by the Tribunal observing that the matter was all along handled by the department in a very routine way and there is nothing on record to show that the department was diligent enough or showed any sense of urgency to show that the appeal was filed on time. The department has relied upon the case of Collector of Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji decided by the Supreme Court reported in 1987 (28) E.L.T. 185 (S.C.) which decision had been adopted by the Delhi High Court in the case of Indian Telephone Industries v. Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal while condoning a delay of 40 days in filing the appeal. The delay in the case decided by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 51 days in filing the S.L.P. was not condoned by the Supreme Court after taking into account the list of dates given in the application for condonation of delay. The Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that even giving the latitude that the Government being impersonal takes longer time than the private bodies or the individual, from the facts narrated in the list of dates, there was no sufficient cause to explain the delay. 6. From the foregoing discussion, we find the decision as to the existence of sufficient cause to condone the delay in filing the appeal or petition had been taken depending upon the facts and circumstances in the respective case. Coming to the present case, we find that the appeal has been filed on 3-7-90, whereas it shoul....