TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 585X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ttled that adjudication on merits has to be preferred instead of rejecting on the technical issues as that of time, unless and until there is an apparent delay that too either with malafide intent or negligence or lack of due diligence. In the present case, none of the circumstances are apparent. Reliance placed in the case of MULLAJI PRINTS P. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE CUSTOMS, SURAT [ 2003 (11) TMI 431 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] wherein it has been held that when the contention of appellants is such that they got a good case on merits non-condonation of delay may result in injustice to them. Otherwise also learned Apex Court has always taken liberal view in condoning delay. Present is a fit case where learned Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the appellant due to unavoidable circumstances, during said period has been the sufficient reason for the delay. But Commissioner (Appeals) has totally ignored the said submission. Also there has been no justification for not exercising the said discretion. Accordingly the order is prayed to be set aside and appeal is prayed to be allowed. 4. To rebut these contentions, learned D.R. has mentioned that there has been repeated delay apparent on part of the appellant as the claim of refund was also filed beyond a period of one year. Appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) was not filed within the statutory period. No reasonable justification has been rendered by the appellant explaining the said period of delay. Hence, there is no infirmity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f unavoidable circumstance is opined to be a sufficient reason for not meeting the time limit in filing the appeal which is otherwise within the scope of condonable limit. Law has been settled that adjudication on merits has to be preferred instead of rejecting on the technical issues as that of time, unless and until there is an apparent delay that too either with malafide intent or negligence or lack of due diligence. In the present case, none of the circumstances are apparent. The learned Counsel for the appellant has in addition impressed upon having a good case on merits. Without reflecting into merit I take my support from the decision referred, namely, Mullaji Prints Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Customs, Surat reported as 2004 (165) ELT 542 (T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
