2021 (9) TMI 572

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pplication; which application has come up for order today. 2. It has been stated that though the order dated 21.06.2019 was received in the Inward Register maintained by the appellant at Sl. No. 568 on 28.06.2019, but the receipt clerk did not deliver the envelope containing the order to the concerned officer, namely Shri Deepak Gaur, Associate Finance, HZL Debari as a result of which the appeal could not be filed within the stipulated time. The appellant subsequently came to know about the passing of the order when a phone call was received by the appellant from department for recovery of the dues and thereafter, the appellant wrote a letter dated 08.01.2020 to the Commissioner (Appeals) for providing the original order, followed by a rem....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appeal within the stipulated time. He, therefore, prays that as the delay has been satisfactorily explained, the appeal should be treated to have been filed within time. 4. Shri Om Prakash Bisht, learned Authorized Representative appearing for the Department has vehemently opposed the delay condonation applications. Learned Authorized Representative has submitted that failure on the part of the receipt clerk in informing the concerned officer cannot be made a ground to condone the delay, more particularly when the delay is of 335 days. In support of this contention, learned Authorized Representative has placed reliance upon the following decisions :- (i) Anita Scrap Traders versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad 2014 (36) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed an affidavit stating these facts. 7. The issue that arises for consideration is whether the appeal should not be entertained on account of the fault of the receipt clerk in not placing the envelope sent by speed post before the officer concerned. It also transpires that as soon as the copy of the order was provided by the Department to the appellant on 09.07.2020, the appeal was filed on 20.08.2020. 8. Learned Authorized Representative of the Department has, however, contended that fault was of the receipt clerk of the appellant in not placing the speed post before the person concerned and this cannot be a satisfactory reason for condoning the delay. In this connection certain decisions of the Tribunal have been relied upon. Each decis....