Condonation of delay in foreign exchange appeal allowed where ex parte adjudication lacked proof of service and delay explanation was bona fide.

Delay of more than eight years in filing an appeal against an ex parte adjudication order was condoned where the record did not show due service of the show cause notice or the adjudication order on the appellant or the erstwhile company. The appellant supported the explanation by affidavit and stated that knowledge of the proceedings arose only on receipt of the public demand notice. The tribunal treated the explanation as bona fide and sufficient, and the discrepancy in the figures on record also indicated that the matter required examination on merits. The condonation application was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay of more than eight years in filing the appeal against the adjudication order should be condoned.

Analysis: The appeal was directed against an ex parte adjudication order, and the record did not show due service of the show cause notice or the adjudication order on the appellant or the erstwhile company. The explanation for the delay was supported by affidavit and was based on the appellant's lack of knowledge of the proceedings until receipt of the public demand notice. The discrepancy noticed in the figures mentioned in the material on record also indicated that the matter required examination on merits. In these circumstances, the explanation for the delay was found to be bona fide and sufficient.

Conclusion: The delay in filing the appeal was condoned and the application for condonation was allowed.

---