2009 (1) TMI 459 - SCH - Central Excise

Condonation of Delay Allowed in Filing Appeal Due to Sufficient Explanation and Cryptic Impugned Order

The SC allowed the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, finding the appellant's explanation sufficient to constitute a valid cause. ... Condonation of delay - sufficient cause - merits cannot be considered in condonation application - cryptic order vitiating exercise of discretion - remand for reasoned decisionCondonation of delay - sufficient cause - Delay in filing the appeal was sufficiently explained and therefore condoned. - HELD THAT: - The Court examined the averments in the application for condonation of delay and found that those averments constituted sufficient cause to condone the delay. The High Court's brief (cryptic) observation did not negate the sufficiency of the explanation provided by the appellant. Accordingly, the exercise of discretion to condone delay in filing the appeal was warranted on the material before this Court. [Paras 2]Delay in filing the appeal is condoned.Merits cannot be considered in condonation application - cryptic order vitiating exercise of discretion - remand for reasoned decision - The High Court erred in rendering a cryptic order and in purporting to address the merits while deciding the condonation application; the impugned order is set aside and the higher appellate proceedings are remitted for fresh, reasoned disposal. - HELD THAT: - The Court reiterated the settled principle that while deciding an application for condonation of delay the High Court should not go into the merits of the appeal; even if such power were assumed, the impugned order failed to disclose any reasoned conclusion as to why the subject-matter did not suffer from infirmity. Because the order was cryptic and lacked reasons, it was set aside. The matter (LPA No. 611 of 2006) is remitted to the High Court to be decided after hearing the parties and by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law within three months from supply of a copy of this order. [Paras 3, 4]Impugned order set aside; LPA No. 611 of 2006 remanded to the High Court for hearing and a reasoned decision within three months.Final Conclusion: The appeal is disposed of by condoning the delay and setting aside the High Court's cryptic order; the High Court is directed to decide LPA No. 611 of 2006 after hearing the parties and delivering a reasoned judgment within three months. There will be no order as to costs. The Supreme Court granted leave in the case after finding sufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. The High Court's observation on the appeal's merits was deemed irrelevant, and the impugned order was set aside. The High Court was instructed to decide the appeal within three months.