9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ground of limitation. Since the appeal was dismissed on the ground of limitation, the Tribunal did not examine the issue involved in the appeal on merits. The order of Tribunal reads as under: "1. This appeal is filed by M/s Pawan Enterprises, Abhaya Chandra Dutta Land, F.A.Road, Kumarpara, Bharalumukh, Guwahati - 781 001 (here-in-after referred to as the "appellant") against the order-in-original No.21/Addl.Commr./ST/VNT/2010-11 dated 10.02.2011 (here-in-after referred to as the "impugned order") passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Guwahati (here-in-after referred to as the "adjudicating authority"). 2. The case was heard on 06.01.2014. Sri Rishi Gupta, Proprietor attended the hearing. The legal defec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourselves of the classic observations made by learned Judge Viviah Bose, J in the case reported in AIR 1955 SC 425 (Sangram Singh -vs- Election Tribunal, Kotah and another). In his distinctive style of writing, the learned Judge speaking for the Bench held: "A Code of procedure must be regarded as such. It is procedure something designed to facilitate justice and further its ends; not a penal enactment for punishment and penalties; not a thing designed to trip people up. Too technical a construction of sections that leaves no room for reasonable elasticity of interpretation should therefore be guarded against (provided always that justice is done to both sides) lest the very means designed for the further laws of procedure are grounded on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... condone the delay. All that we wish to say is that by and large, the approach of the court should be to ensure that substantial justice is done to parties by affording them an opportunity of hearing on the merits of the case. Having regard to the nature of the controversy, the grounds taken for condonation in filing the appeal and lastly applying the observations made by the Supreme Court in Sangram Singh (supra) to the facts of this case, we are of the view that the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal should have been condoned. Since the Tribunal did not do it, we, on our own, condone the delay. So far as the other ground relating to signing of appeal by one staff member of the appellant etc. is concerned, the same too, in our ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
