1990 (2) TMI 156

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellants have sought for condonation of delay. Sh. Venkataraman, Sr. Manager, appearing for the appellants, submitted that the delay in filing was on account of the order-in-appeal being received by the appellants in a different office at R & P Division, Mourigram Terminal instead of their Marketing Division, Mourigram Terminal. The Marketing Division who received the copy of the order-in-appeal on 30-8-1989, were not aware of the order being delivered to R & P Division. Both the offices have not maintained the Inward Register. Nor they are following the procedure of putting initials on the Inward papers and affixing the stamp of their office to indicate the date of receipt. Hence, they are not in a position to state the exact date of rece....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion is not in the normal format. It is typed on a white sheet without even the Cause title or signed by any person. The relevant portion of paras 1, 2 and 4 are reproduced below :- "The appeal Order No. 23/CAL-II/89 dated 23-3-1989 is a Consolidated order for Appellants Mourigram Terminal and Port Blair. The order-in-appeal under 23/CAL-II/89 dated 23-3-1989 was endorsed by the Supdt. (CE)(Appeals) on 30-5-1989 issued subsequently appear to had been delivered to Indian Oil Corporation Limited (R&P Division) Mourigram Terminal instead of Indian Oil Corporation Limited (Marketing Division) Mourigram Terminal. Since the appeal order was subsequently received from the Pipeline Division, Mourigram on 30-8-1989. x x x x Due to above reason, t....