2012 (12) TMI 303

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 22-9-2011 they could not reach when their application was taken up for disposal. In these circumstances the order dismissing their appeal is recalled and restored. The applicant have also filed application for condonation of delay of 261 days. The same is taken up for disposal. The contention of the applicant is that delay is not deliberate or intentional. The contention is that their company was declared sick and proceedings were initiated in the High Court at Delhi for winding up. There was only 15 skeleton staff due to which it was not possible for them to keep track of the things. After receipt of the order, they sought legal opinion from M/s. Sandersons and Morgans, Advocate whether there was sufficient ground to file appeal. Later, v....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... filed on 27-7-2005 after excluding the period for filing the appeal, the delay comes to 170 days. The contention is that the applicant could not explain the delay for the period from 4-2-2005 to 5-4-2005, 26-4-2005 to 9-6-2005 and 9-6-2005 to 27-7-2005. The contention is that the advocate of the applicant have informed them on 24-1-2005 that they have a strong case, despite of that the appellant did not file the appeal. Subsequently on 2-2-2005 also they were informed, thereafter also the applicant did not file the appeal. The contention is that they were to take clearance from COD did not prevent them from filing the appeal. The contention is that this Tribunal vide its order No. M-256/KOL/2011 dated-14-12-2011 in the case of CCE (P) v. M....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... after excluding the period allowed for filing the appeal, the delay works out to 170 days. 6. We find that the applicant could not explain delay for the period 4-2-2005 to 5-4-2005, 26-4-2005 to 9-6-2005, from 9-6-2005 to 27-7-2005. Section 35 provides for condonation of delay in filing appeal if sufficient cause is shown. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Living Media held as under : "12. It is not in dispute that the person(s) concerned were well aware or conversant with the issues involved including the prescribed Period of limitation for taking up the matter by way of filing a special leave petition in this Court. They cannot claim that they have a separate period of limitation when the Department was possessed with ....