9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 614X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder on 23-4-08 and filed the present appeal on 18-5-09. The extent of delay is nearly 300 days, as against '387 working days' mentioned in the present application. This application says that the delay has occurred on account of transfer of officers. It says that the new incumbents were not aware of the matter. It further says that there was pressure of work in the appraising group. The prayer in this application is to condone the 'inadvertent delay involved in the filing of the appeal. The ld. SDR has presented a chronology of events leading to the filing of the appeal According to this write-up, the appraising officer concerned received a copy of the appellate Commissioner's order on 23-4-08 and, on the same day, mooted a proposal for fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statutory period of limitation for the appeal. This apparently, was not done in the present case, to the detriment of the Revenue. 3. The ld. SDR has fairly requested for a favourable decision in the public interest rather than on the stated grounds. He is requesting for an equitable relief. Such a relief can be sought only by a person who comes with clean hands. Here the person concerned is an Asstt. Commissioner of Customs authorized by the review committee. That officer or his predecessor-in-office has not in any manner acted in furtherance of the public interest. Had appropriate proceedings been taken in the public interest, there would not have been any occasion for us to take a hard decision against the appellant. 4. Ld. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat latitude, there must be some way or attempt to explain the cause for such delay". The ld. SDR has sought to underline latitude having to be shown to the department, and has, in this connection, relied on the decision in the case of State of Nagaland v. Lipok AO [2005 (183) E.L.T. 337 (S.C.)] and Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Another v. MST, Katiji and Others [1987 (28) E.L.T. 185 (S. C.)]. 5. We have perused the cited decisions and find that, in all the cases, the reasons offered by the appellants for condonation of the delay of appeals were found to be satisfactory. The present case is altogether different. As we have already noted, the only reason stated by the department for the condonation of the delay of nearly 30 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
