2006 (4) TMI 38

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sposing the appeal filed by the respondents, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order of the lower authority relying on a decision of the Tribunal in the case of L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut-II - 2006 (3) S.T.R. 230(Tribunal) = 2004 (165) E.L.T. 161 (Tri Del.) upheld by the Supreme Court vide 2006 (3) S.T.R. 715 (S.C.) = 2005 (187) E.L.T. 5 (S.C.) = 2005-TIOL. 105-SC-ST. The demand had been made in that case pursuant to the proceedings under Section 73 of Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal had held that Section 73 applied to persons liable to file return under Section 70. Section 71A covered Goods Transport Operators and C&F Agents. The class of persons covered by Section 71 was not bought under the net of Section 73. Therefo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i) Collector v. MST. Katiji & Others - 1987 (28) E.L.T. 185 (S.C.) (ii) State of Haryana v. Chandra Mani -2002 (143) E.L.T. 249 (S.C.) (iii) State of Nagaland v. Lipok AO - 2005 (183) E.L.T. 337 (S.C.) Though standard of proof of "sufficient cause" was not different in cases of State and private litigant, they could not be put on same footing as individual would always be quicker in taking decisions. The Govt, being a impersonal machinery where no one was in charge of the matter was directly hit or hurt by the judgment sought to be subjected to appeal and the inherited bureaucratic methodology imbued with the note-making, file pushing and passing of the buck ethos, delay on its part was less difficult to understand. As the State re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al filed after change of legal position/clarification by a subsequent decision was not a just cause for condonation of delay in late filing of appeal. Learned Advocate further submitted that the condonation of delay application did not indicate when the Civil Appeal was filed and the reason for the delay between the admission of the Civil Appeals and the filing of the subject appeal. 5. 1 have considered the rival submissions. From the condonation of delay application it is obvious that the appeal had been belatedly filed not because of the slow functioning of the department. It is apparent that the Order-in- Appeal was accepted and later, on coming to know that certain civil appeals had been admitted by the Supreme Court, the subject ap....