2016 (6) TMI 408

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2015-DB and E.40663/2015-DB dated 25.09.2015, declining to condone the delay of 405 days in filing the appeals, against the final orders in Nos.41234/2015 and 41235/2015, respectively, instant Civil Miscellaneous Appeals viz., CMA Nos.754 and 755 of 2016, are filed. 2. Assailing the correctness of the impugned orders, Mr.L.J.Vengatesh, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that before CESTAT, Chennai Bench, imposition of duty and personal penalty of Rs. 10,37,673/-, were challenged. 3. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, though the order dated 10.09.2013 passed in Appeal Nos.121 and 122 of 2013 dated 10.09.2013, was received by the appellant's tenant on 05.11.2013, it was misplaced by them and thereafter they....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Vs. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy and Others, reported in (2013) 12 SCC 649 and other decisions referred to in the memorandum of grounds. During the course of argument, learned counsel for the appellant also submitted that the department's appeal was condoned, with a delay of more than 1000 days. 6. Per contra, inviting the attention of this Court to the reasons assigned in Ground Nos.4 and 5 of the supporting affidavit filed for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, Mr.S.Haja Mohideen Gisthi, learned Senior Panel counsel submitted that the reasons assigned are not satisfactory and thus, the tribunal has rightly dismissed the condone delay petitions. He submitted that the well considered order of the tribunal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r spirit, philosophy and purpose regard being had to the fact that these terms are basically elastic and are to be applied in proper perspective to the obtaining fact-situation. 21.3. (iii) Substantial justice being paramount and pivotal the technical considerations should not be given undue and uncalled for emphasis. 21.4. (iv) No presumption can be attached to deliberate causation of delay but, gross negligence on the part of the counsel or litigant is to be taken note of. 21.5. (v) Lack of bona fides imputable to a party seeking condonation of delay is a significant and relevant fact. 21.6. (vi) It is to be kept in mind that adherence to strict proof should not affect public justice and cause public mi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aradigm of judicial discretion which is founded on objective reasoning and not on individual perception. 21.13. (xiii) The State or a public body or an entity representing a collective cause should be given some acceptable latitude." 10. Reverting to the case on hand, it could be seen that the order impugned is imposition of duty and personal penalty to the tune of Rs. 10,37,673/-. As observed supra, the said order certainly is prejudicial to the interest of the appellant. Though, while dismissing the condonation petition, CESTAT, Chennai Bench, has observed that there is no justifiable cause, going through the reasons assigned, it could be seen that the appellant has not offered a detailed explanation. For brevity, paragraph No....