Condonation of delay in excise appeal required judicial consideration of BIFR sickness and factory closure before rejection as time-barred.

Delay in filing an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) may be condoned where the appeal is presented within the further period under the proviso to Section 35B(1) and the surrounding circumstances justify a liberal, judicial approach. The appellant's status as a sick unit declared by BIFR, together with closure of the factory, were material factors that should have been considered before rejecting the matter as time-barred. The lower appellate authority had not given adequate consideration to those circumstances, so the delay was condoned and the appeal was remanded for decision on merits after a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) ought to be condoned and the appeal restored for decision on merits.

Analysis: The appeal had been filed within the further period contemplated by the proviso to Section 35B(1) of the Central Excise Act. The record showed that the appellant was a sick unit declared by BIFR and that its factory was closed. These circumstances were relevant to the request for condonation of delay and ought to have been considered in a reasonable and judicial manner. The lower appellate order did not disclose adequate consideration of these circumstances before rejecting the appeal as time-barred.

Conclusion: The delay was condoned and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal on merits after granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

Final Conclusion: The appellant succeeded in obtaining condonation of delay and a fresh adjudication of the appeal on merits before the first appellate authority.

---