TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 740X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant because he fell ill. Because of these difficulties, the delay in filing appeal happened. Learned SDR stated that he would leave it to the Bench to decide this issue. After going through the COD application running into more than 3 pages, I am satisfied that this is a fit case for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the delay of 40 days in filing appeal is condoned. 2. I find that the appellants have also sought stay of the impugned order. As pointed out by learned SDR, the impugned order has not confirmed any demand against the appellant and therefore, the stay application itself is infractuous. However, since the issue involved is short and the matter is a covered one, with the consent of both sides, the appeal itself is taken up f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso submits that the Commissioner has traveled beyond the show cause notice in rejecting the application on the ground that no application for condonation of delay in filing application beyond 24 hours was submitted. He also relies upon two decisions of the Tribunal in support of his contention that when there is no dispute about the actual loss of finished goods, inputs etc., delay in submission of application cannot be a ground of rejection of the same. The decisions are : one in case of M/s. DSM Sugar v. CCE, Meerut - 2008 (228) E.L.T. 301 (Tri.-Del.) and another in case of M/s. Shakumbari Sugar Allied Indus. Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut - 2004 (171) E.L.T. 286 (Tri.-Del.). The second ground taken by the Commissioner for rejection of remission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Board. 5. I have considered the submissions made by both sides. I find that as rightly pointed out by learned advocate, the Commissioner should not have rejected the remission application on the ground that there was a delay in filing appeal in view of the fact that there are Tribunal s decisions holding that the delay in filing application cannot be a ground for rejection of remission application when there is no dispute regarding loss occurring as a result of circumstances outlined in the relevant rules. I find that two decisions cited by the learned advocate are relevant and are required to be followed. As regards second ground taken by the Commissioner, I agree that the contention of the appellant that in Grasim Industries case, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
