TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 978X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant-Company. It is stated that Mr. Vasudevan, Manager of the Company left the service without handing over the papers to his successor. The learned Counsel for the appellant argued the case on merits, which has no relevance unless the delay is condoned. It is not the case of the applicant that the Manager had left the Company with the case file. It is the duty of the successor to trace the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the applicant. - Condonation denied. - E/42509/2013-SM - Final Order No. 40242/2014 - Dated:- 10-3-2014 - Shri Pradip Kumar Das, Member (J) Shri M.N. Bharathi, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri P. Arul, Supdt., AR, for the Respondent. ORDER The applicant filed this application for condonation of delay of 175 days in filing the appeal. The learned Counsel on behalf of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eason of misplacement of the case papers by the employee of the company. He relies on the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Prem Heavy Engineering Works v. CESTAT reported in 2013 (292) E.L.T. 326 (All.), Sri Bhavani Castings Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Visakhapatnam-II reported in 2012 (275) E.L.T. 321 (A.P.) = 2012 (28) S.T.R. 311 (A.P.) and he also relie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the duty of the successor to trace the files lying in the office. It is seen that the applicant appeared in personal hearing before the Commissioner (Appeals). Thus, they were well aware of the proceeding before Commissioner (Appeals). There is a gross negligence and inaction on the part of he applicant. The Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Prem Heavy Engineering Works (supra) dismissed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
