9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (5) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Accordingly the application is allowed and these two documents are taken on record. 2. The Stay Petition is filed by the applicant praying that the pre-deposit of the duty demanded in terms of the orders passed by the adjudicating authority be stayed during the pendency of the Appeal. 2A. In this case, after the adjudicating authority passed the order requiring the applicant to deposit the duty in question, an Appeal was filed before the Collector of Customs (Appeals). But without entering into the merits of the case, the Appeal was dismissed on the ground that there was 27 days' delay. The appeal actually was received by the applicant on 30-4-1992. The last date of filing the Appeal was on 29-7-1992, but the Appeal was actually filed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 27th August, 1992. He also pointed out that the concerned person was under medical supervision due to illness and he was asked to take rest. He, therefore, stated that sufficient cause is made out to condone the delay. In support of his contentions, he relied on the following decisions :- (1) 1987 (28) E.L.T. 185 - Land Acquisition Officer v. Mst. Katiji (2) 1987 (32) E.L.T. 258 (SC) - Bhag Singh & Ors. v. Major Daljit Singh & Ors. 6. The learned SDR Shri Dutt Majumder contended that misplacement of papers by the appellants is no good ground to condone the delay. He also pointed out that the medical certificate as well as the affidavit was not produced before the Collector of Customs (Appeals). It was also pointed out that during the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there was a delay of about 58 days. There was no such representation made by the appellants in that case that they could not file the appeal in time and they may be granted extension. But in this case, within eight days of the expiry date, the appellants' representative, approached the learned Collector and appraised him of the fact that the files were misplaced due to shifting. It only goes to show that the appellants were keen in filing the appeal but the records were misplaced due to shifting. In the case relied on by the learned SDR, it is not clear whether the records were misplaced due to the shifting. Therefore, that case is not similar to the facts of this case. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Tribunal reported in 1985 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nbsp; * * * * * * * * * * 9. The decision of the Supreme Court in Mst. Katiji was clearly dealt with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce. A justice-oriented approach should be taken in such cases. The expression sufficient cause is adequately elastic to enable the courts to apply the same in a meaningful manner and in order to subserve the ends of justice. That is why, the Honourable Supreme Court stated in the above-cited case that a liberal approach is to be adopted in this count. Applying the above principles to the facts of this case, it is seen that the case of the applicant that the records were misplaced is clearly brought out in view of the letter dated 6-8-1992, which was replied by the department on 10-8-1992 and thereafter they were traced out and the Appeal was actually filed on 27-8-1992. The total delay caused will be about 29 or 30 days and in the facts and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
