TMI Blog1991 (1) TMI 258X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deciding the present application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal except to state a few facts. By the present appeal the appellants have challenged the Adjudication Order-in-Original dated 9-2-1990 (issued on 21-2-1990 passed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Allahabad). According to sub-section (3) of Section 35-B of the Central Excises Salt Act, 1944 such appeals are required to be filed within 3 months from the date on which the order sought to be appealed against is communicated to the party preferring the appeal. In the instant case as per the statement made by the appellants in Column 3 of the Memorandum of Appeal (Form No. EA-3) the said order of adjudication was communicated to them on 28-2-1990. Counting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The appellants have also enclosed the certified copy of the order dated 28-8-1990 passed in their Writ Petition No. 448 of 1990 by Allahabad High Court and also the certified copy of the order dated 28-8-1990 passed by Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No. 141 of 1990 filed by M/s. Kanpur Plastipack Ltd. and Others v. UOI Others. 4. In reply, Shri J.N. Nair, learned JDR on behalf of the respondent submitted that the appeal was not filed within 10 days as directed by the Allahabad High Court and therefore it is liable to be dismissed as time-barred. Elaborating on his submission, he submitted that from the certified copies of the two orders both dated 28-8-1990 passed by Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No. 141 of 1990 and W.P.: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal. Even there was no necessity for filing the application for condonation of delay separately as the appellant could have filed the present appeal within 10 days from the date of the order of the Court that is to say 28-8-1990 making an averment in the memorandum of appeal itself that the High Court had directed that if the appeal is filed within 10 days from 28-8-1990 it will be entertained by the Tribunal treating the same as filed within time. 5. In his rejoinder Shri N. B. Singh, Director of the Appellant s Company submitted that in the Writ Petition No. 448 of 1990 filed by the appellants no independent order was passed by the High Court and what was passed was to the effect that The Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as having been filed within time in view of the direction given by the High Court in its Order dated 28-8-1990 passed in Writ Petition No. 448 of 1990. From the two certified copies of the order both dated 28-8-1990 passed in Writ Petition No. 141 of 1990 filed by M/s. Kanpur Plastipack Ltd. and others and Writ Petition No. 448 of 1990 filed by the present appellant it appears that both the said Writ Petitions were disposed of on the same day i.e. 28-8-1990 and the said Writ Petitions relate to the dispute relating to the classification of goods produced by the appellants as well as by the said others and the Court directed the parties to raise the question of classification before the Central Excise authorities with a direction that In ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le, preferably within three months from the date of its presentation. This direction is given keeping in view the fact that a large amount of Revenue is said to be involved in the matter. It is further directed that where appeals are filed, there shall be a stay of operation of order under appeal for a period of six weeks from today. Within that period, it will be open to the petitioners to apply to the authority for appropriate interim orders under Section 35 of the Act. If such an application is filed, it shall be disposed of forthwith according to law. The writ petitions are disposed of with the above directions. Certified copies of this Order may be issued to the counsel for the petitioners within 24 hours on payment of usual charge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Court in their Writ Petition No. 448 of 1990 on 28-8-1990. Even otherwise from the two certified copies of the said orders both dated 28-8-1990 filed by the appellants we find that the appellants did apply for the copy of the order dated 28-8-1990 passed in their Writ Petition No. 448 of 1990 on 29-8-1990 and received it on the same day but did not apply for the certified copy of the order dated 28-8-1990 passed in Writ Petition No. 141 of 1990. Instead they waited and allowed the period of ten days given by the Court to file the appeal to expire by their own conduct and negligence and applied for the copy of the Order passed in W.P. No. 141 of 1990 only on 11-9-1990 which was supplied on 12-9-1990. In the teeth of these admitted facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
