Appeal Dismissed: Delay Not Justified by Appellate Tribunal

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI dismissed the appeal seeking condonation of delay in filing an appeal due to the death of the assessee and subsequent knowledge by the legal heir. The Tribunal found that the reasons provided for the delay, such as the deceased's medical treatment and delayed receipt of the order, were insufficient. Additionally, documents showed reminders and communications from the Department contradicting the appellant's claim of not receiving the order timely. The Tribunal concluded that there was no valid explanation for the initial delay of two years and dismissed the application for condonation of delay.

---

---

Issues: Application for condonation of delay in filing appeal due to the death of the assessee and subsequent knowledge by the legal heir.

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI, the issue at hand was the application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal due to the death of the assessee and subsequent knowledge by the legal heir. The appellant, the legal heir of the deceased proprietor, sought condonation of delay in filing an appeal against an order dated 8th May, 2014, on the grounds that he acquired knowledge of the order only on 23rd February, 2018, following the death of the assessee on 3rd November, 2016. The appellant contended that the delay in filing the appeal within three months was due to the deceased's medical treatment and the delayed receipt of the impugned order.

The Tribunal considered the arguments presented by both parties. The Departmental Representative objected to the condonation of delay, stating that the impugned order was communicated within time, and there was no valid reason for the delay. Upon reviewing the records, the Tribunal noted that the order under challenge was announced on 18th May, 2014, and the assessee passed away on 3rd November, 2016. The Tribunal found that the reasons cited for the delay, including the deceased's medical treatment and delayed receipt of the order by the appellant, were not sufficient grounds for condonation.

The Tribunal further observed that the appellant's claim of not receiving the order prior to 23rd February, 2018, was contradicted by documents showing repeated reminders and communications from the Department. Additionally, the original adjudicating authority had previously highlighted the non-cooperative behavior of the deceased assessee in providing required documents. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that there was no cogent explanation for the initial delay of two years and dismissed the application for condonation of delay.

In light of the above observations and findings, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, stating that the benefit sought by the legal representatives of the deceased proprietor could not be extended in the given circumstances. The appeal was consequently dismissed by the Tribunal.

---