Sufficient cause for delayed appeal failed where record movement and misplaced papers did not explain the full delay.

Delay in filing an appeal under Section 35B(3) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was not condoned because the explanation of inter-departmental movement of papers and misplacement of records did not satisfactorily cover the entire period of delay. As sufficient cause was not established, the appeal was treated as barred by limitation and dismissed, along with the stay petition.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the appeal was liable to be condoned on the ground of sufficient cause.

Analysis: The appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period under Section 35B(3) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The delay was attributed to inter-departmental movement of papers and misplacement of records, but the explanation did not satisfactorily account for the entire period of delay.

Conclusion: The delay was not condoned. The appeal was barred by limitation and was dismissed along with the stay petition.

---