Stay abreast with the latest developments in the professional domain along with in-depth analysis through the monthly BCA Journal. Get access to an engaging library of researched publications from the BCAS stable.
Learn MoreExplore past issues of BCA Journal & indulge in a treasure trove of high-quality professional content across format of print, videos & learning events from the BCAS stable.
Learn More
Facts:
The petitioners filed appeal before CESTAT with an application for condonation of delay of 175 days mentioning the reason for delay. The Tribunal rejected the application on the ground that they had not replied to Show Cause Notice nor did the petitioner’s representative participate in adjudication proceedings. When first appeal was filed, there was a delay of 15 days which showed that they had taken issue lightly. In second appeal, there was a delay of 175 days and the affidavit filed with application for condonation of delay was not sworn by the Director or authorised representative and therefore, the application for condonation of delay was rejected. Accordingly, present petition is filed.
Held:
The petitioners had shown sufficient cause for belated filing of appeal and should have been granted an opportunity to present their case on merits before CESTAT . Therefore, it was held that the Tribunal had committed an error. Accordingly, the present petition was allowed along with direction to CESTAT to decide the matter in accordance with law and on merits.
