Commissioner Of Central Excise vs. Sri Rajinder Singh

Held

The Court allowed the Miscellaneous Application for restoration. The reasoning was based on the explanation provided by the learned counsel for the appellant, who stated that there had not been any deliberate laches in pursuing the appeal, and the situation arose possibly due to changes in the office of the learned counsel representing the Department. The Court was persuaded by the reasons assigned in the application. The Court directed the learned counsel for the appellant to file two copies of the memo of appeal in M.A. No. 724 of 2009 by 03rd of May, 2019. The ratio decidendi is that where there is no deliberate laches and the delay is attributable to administrative changes or counsel's office, and the appellant demonstrates a willingness to pursue the matter, restoration of a dismissed appeal may be granted, even if records have been destroyed, provided the appellant undertakes to refile necessary documents.

Facts

The petitioner, Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna (now Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Patna-II), filed a Miscellaneous Application for the restoration of Miscellaneous Appeal No. 724 of 2009. This appeal, along with three other similar appeals (M.A. Nos. 704, 722, and 723 of 2009), had been dismissed for failure to comply with a peremptory order dated 27.11.2013. While M.A. No. 704 of 2009 survived, the others were dismissed on similar grounds. The dismissal of the other appeals only came to light when M.A. No. 704 of 2009 was being considered. The petitioner's counsel attributed the delay to changes in the office representing the Department. The original records for M.A. No. 724 of 2009 had been destroyed as per Patna High Court Rules.

Key Issues

1. Whether Miscellaneous Appeal No. 724 of 2009 should be restored to its original file, considering the delay in filing the restoration application and the destruction of the original records. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that there was no deliberate laches in pursuing the appeal. The delay was attributed to changes in the learned counsel representing the Department. They sought restoration of the appeal. Opposite Party's Arguments: The judgment does not record any arguments from the opposite party (Sri Rajinder Singh, Managing Director, M/s. Mansi Steels (P) Ltd.).