2006 (8) TMI 498

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellant. Shri M.N. Bharati, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The impugned order was received in the Commissionerate, Chennai-III on 1-12-2005. The appeal against it was filed with the Tribunal on 23-3-06, with a delay of 23 days. Incidentally, it is interesting to note that the appeal has been filed by the Committee of Commissioners, whose function was only to review the impugned....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....be defeated. Reliance is placed on the Supreme Court's judgment in State of Nagaland v. Lipok AO [2005 (183) E.L.T. 337 (S.C.)], wherein it was held that some latitude was permissible in favour of Government Departments seeking condonation of delay of appeals due to procedural red tape in Governmental functions. Ld. JCDR reiterates the above explanation of delay and prays for its condonation for t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ter considering the submissions, I do not think that sufficient cause has been shown by the appellants for condoning the delay of their appeal. Their explanation is that the Committee of Commissioners could not be convened early enough to review the appellate Commissioner's order on account of their pre-occupation with Budget-related work and "other administrative reasons". The appellants, however....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e appellant in the present application, as an excuse for the delay of their appeal, is that there were frequent power cuts power cuts "which disrupted the normal functioning of the official machinery". Such an excuse does not augur well for ld. Commissioners. The case law cited by both sides has also been examined. In the case of State of Nagaland (supra), a Bench of two Judges of the Supreme Cour....