Delay condonation under Central Excise law should advance substantive justice where non-communication of the order is unexplained.

Delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal was examined under Section 35B(5) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Court noted that the Tribunal did not address the explanation that the adjudication order had not been communicated to the authorised person, and it considered the appellant's status as a public sector undertaking. Applying the principle that procedural rules are intended to advance substantive justice, the Court held that the delay condonation application ought to have been allowed and answered the substantial questions of law in favour of the appellant.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal ought to have been condoned under Section 35B(5) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis: The appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period, but the explanation that the adjudication order had not been communicated to the authorised person was not dealt with by the Tribunal. The Court also considered the nature of the appellant as a public sector undertaking and applied the principle that procedural rules serve substantive justice.

Conclusion: The delay condonation application ought to have been allowed and the substantial questions of law were answered in favour of the appellant.

---