Appeal Dismissed Due to Delay; Explanations Found Insufficient

The appeal challenging an order by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal faced delays in filing and re-filing, with insufficient reasons provided for the delays. Despite revised explanations, the court found the justifications lacking in specifics. The extended inactivity of over two years and five months, without a satisfactory explanation, led to the dismissal of the appeal. Citing the importance of providing acceptable explanations for delays, especially for government bodies, the court emphasized that condonation of delay should not be granted mechanically. The applications for condonation of delay were dismissed, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.

---

---

Issues:
1. Delay in filing the appeal and application for condonation of delay.
2. Inordinate delay in re-filing the appeal.

Issue 1: Delay in filing the appeal and application for condonation of delay

The appellant challenged an order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, almost 10 months after its receipt. Initially, an application for condonation of delay was filed citing misplacement of file papers and subsequent oversight as reasons. However, the application lacked specificity regarding the period of delay. A revised application was later submitted, detailing the delay due to the bulky nature of the appeal, misplacement of papers, and the process of obtaining necessary documents for the appeal. Despite some improvement in explanation, the court found the reasons provided to be lacking in particulars.

Issue 2: Inordinate delay in re-filing the appeal

After the initial filing, the appeal faced multiple setbacks, including missing court fees, incorrect title, and other defects. The appeal was returned under objection and was re-filed with continued defects. Notably, a hard copy was not submitted as required, leading to further delays. Subsequent inaction for over two years and five months, with a significant portion overlapping with the COVID-19 pandemic, was observed. The court highlighted that there was no explanation provided for this extended period of inactivity.

In the judgment, the court referenced the case of Post Master General and Ors. v. Living Media India Ltd and Anr., where the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of providing a plausible and acceptable explanation for delays, especially for government bodies. The court noted that condonation of delay should not be granted mechanically, and government departments are obligated to perform their duties diligently. Consequently, the applications seeking condonation of delay were dismissed, leading to the dismissal of the appeal as well.

---