2002 (7) TMI 186 - AT - Central Excise

Appeal Dismissed for Filing Delay; Tribunal Cannot Condone Late Appeals or Hear on Merits

The appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to delay in filing, which was beyond the condonable period. The Tribunal cannot direct ... Limitation - condonation of delay - finality of order-in-original - scope of Tribunal's power to condone delay - stay of demand - pre-deposit waiverLimitation - condonation of delay - finality of order-in-original - scope of Tribunal's power to condone delay - Whether the appeal filed after expiry of nine months and eleven days from receipt of the order-in-original could be entertained and whether the Tribunal could direct condonation of delay or itself condone the delay so that the appeal may be adjudicated on merits. - HELD THAT: - The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appellants' appeal as time-barred because it was filed nine months and eleven days after receipt of the order-in-original. Under the statutory scheme, the Commissioner (Appeals) may condone delay only up to three months; where the delay exceeds that period the Commissioner (Appeals) has no power to condone it. The Deputy Commissioner's order-in-original became final against the appellants because they failed to challenge it within the prescribed three-month period. The Tribunal has no power under the Central Excise Act to direct the Commissioner (Appeals) to condone delay beyond his statutory power, nor can the Tribunal itself condone a delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal's power to condone delay is confined to appeals filed before it against orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) where sufficient cause is shown for condonation of delay in approaching the Tribunal. Because the Commissioner (Appeals) rightly rejected the appeal as time-barred, the Tribunal could not enter into the merits of the duty demand or grant relief such as waiver of pre-deposit or stay of demand. [Paras 3, 4, 5]Appeal dismissed; Tribunal cannot condone or direct condonation of the delay so as to permit adjudication on merits; merits and stay application refused.Final Conclusion: The Commissioner (Appeals) correctly dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation; the Tribunal lacked power to direct or effect condonation of the nine months and eleven days' delay and therefore could not consider the merits or grant stay or waiver of pre-deposit. The appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to delay in filing, which was beyond the condonable period. The Tribunal cannot direct condonation of delay or hear the appeal on merits. The appeal was rejected as time-barred, and the stay application was also rejected.