2004 (12) TMI 690 - HC - Customs

Court upholds dismissal of writ appeal citing insufficient reasons for delay in filing.

The High Court affirmed the decision of the Tribunal and the Single Judge, dismissing the writ appeal filed by the appellant. The Court held that the ... Condonation of delay - sufficient cause - discretionary power of tribunal in condoning delay - absence of power of review under the Customs Act - jurisdiction of High Court under Article 227Condonation of delay - sufficient cause - discretionary power of tribunal in condoning delay - absence of power of review under the Customs Act - Whether the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal rightly refused to condone the six months' delay in filing the appeal. - HELD THAT: - The Tribunal, applying its discretion, found that the sole ground advanced in the application - that the appellant was awaiting the outcome of an application to recall the Commissioner's order in consequence of an unrelated High Court order - did not constitute sufficient cause for the inordinate delay. The High Court held that the recall application was misconceived because there is no power of review under the Customs Act, rendering the reliance on that pending application irrelevant. The High Court also accepted the Single Judge's finding that any bereavement in the managing director's family did not prevent the company from filing the appeal within time, especially since the company continued to pursue other matters (such as licence renewal) during the relevant period. Having regard to these facts, the Tribunal's exercise of discretion in refusing condonation was neither arbitrary nor founded on irrelevant considerations and therefore did not call for interference under Article 227.The Tribunal correctly declined to condone the delay; the refusal to condone was not interfered with.Final Conclusion: Writ appeal dismissed; the order of the Tribunal refusing condonation of delay and dismissing the appeal as time barred is upheld; no order as to costs. Issues:Delay in filing appeal before Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, grounds for condonation of delay, exercise of discretionary power by Tribunal, challenge before learned Single Judge, appeal before High Court.Analysis:The appellant, a company engaged in the production and export of granite slabs, received a notice from the Deputy Commissioner of Customs demanding Customs Duty foregone on capital goods/consumables during import. The appellant's appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) was dismissed, leading to an appeal before the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, with a six-month delay. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as barred by time due to insufficient cause for delay.The appellant filed a writ petition challenging the Tribunal's decision before the learned Single Judge, citing bereavement in the family of the managing director and an application to recall the Commissioner's order. The Single Judge found these reasons insufficient, emphasizing that the company had pursued other applications during the period. The Single Judge upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that its discretionary power was not arbitrary.The appellant filed a writ appeal before the High Court, arguing that the delay was justified due to the pending application to recall the Commissioner's order. The High Court, after reviewing the facts, agreed with the Single Judge's decision. The High Court found no merit in the appeal, stating that the reasons provided did not amount to sufficient cause for condonation of the delay. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that the bereavement in the family did not prevent timely filing of the appeal.In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the writ appeal, affirming the decision of the Tribunal and the Single Judge. The High Court found no grounds to interfere, stating that the exercise of discretion by the Tribunal was appropriate, and the reasons provided by the appellant were not sufficient to justify the delay in filing the appeal.