The Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Daman Commissionerate Versus M/s. Wellknown Polyesters Ltd.
Central Excise
2018 (9) TMI 748 – BOMBAY HIGH COURT – TMI
BOMBAY HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 7-9-2018
Notice of Motion No. 119 of 2018 in Central Excise Appeal (L) No. 54 of 2013
Central Excise
M. S. SANKLECHA AND RIYAZ IQBAL CHAGLA, JJ.
Ms. P. S. Cardozo, Advocate for the Applicant / Appellant.
Mr. Jas Sanghavi, Advocate I/by PDS Legal for the Respondent.
P.C.
1 This Motion seeks condonation of 529 days delay in filing the present Notice of Motion that seeks to set aside the self-operating order dated 21.04.2016 passed by the Prothonotary and Senior Master, rejecting the applicant's appeal under Rule 986 of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, for failure to remove office objections within the stipulated time i.e. 19.05.2016.
2. We have perused the affidavit in support of the Motion, filed by Mr. S.K. Jha, Assistant Commissioner of Central GST dated 0
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
the exact date when the appellant department learnt about the rejection order dated 21.04.2016 passed by the Prothonotary and Senior Master. The only reason set out therein is that there is a change in the panel of Advocates and the appellant is a statutory government authority, responsible for collection of the revenue under the relevant statute.
5. The reasons set out in the said affidavit for the delay are not satisfactory and rather, it reflects casual attitude on the part of the officers of the revenue. It appears that after filing of the appeal and /or engaging a panel Advocate, the officers of the Revenue proceed as if their responsibility is over. In fact, this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2017) 84 Taxmann.com 313 under the Income Tax Act, 1961 has observed as under :
“8. We have found that if the number of appeals filed by the Revenue are approximately thousand per year or more, then, we expect the Revenue to appoint and depute responsib
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
urt to be lenient and liberal and pardon them every time. It is this approach of the Revenue officials which is not only strongly deprecated in the earlier order but this Court has refused to uphold it after it was noticed that this is the position in almost every matter.”
The aforesaid observations apply equally apply to the present facts.
6. When attention was drawn of the counsel for the Revenue with regard to the aforesaid observations of this Court, she responded by contending that the government is impersonal entity and depend upon its officers to perform their job. Therefore, when the officer has not done his job properly, the State should not suffer on that count. This very submission was the subject matter of consideration before the Apex Court in the case of Office of the Chief Post Master General V. Livinmg Media India Ltd. and Anr. (2012) 348 ITR 7 (SC), (2012) 3 SCC 563, wherein the Apex Court has, inter alia, observed as follows (page 19 of 348 ITR) :
” It is not in di
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
methodology of making several notes cannot be accepted in view of the modern technologies being used and available. The law of limitation undoubtedly binds everybody including the Government.
In our view, it is the right time to inform all the government bodies, their agencies and instrumentalities that unless they have reasonable and acceptable explanation for the delay and there was bonafide effort, there is no need to accept the usual explanation that the file was kept pending for several months/years due to considerable degree of procedural redtape in the process. The government departments are under a special obligation to ensure that they perform their duties with diligence and commitment. Condonation of delay is an exception and should not be used as an anticipated benefit for government departments. The law shelters everyone under the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a few.”
7. We are of the view that the above observations equally apply to this
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =