M/S V.D. Engineering vs. Commissioner

Held

The High Court held that while the appeal might be liable to be admitted on a question of law, both the appellate authority and the Tribunal had dismissed the petitioner's appeals on the ground of delay. Since no sufficient cause for the delay was explained, the High Court could not consider the question of law. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s V.D. Engineering, filed an appeal before the High Court against an order dated 01.08.2019 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The CESTAT had dismissed the petitioner's appeal on grounds of delay. Prior to this, the petitioner had filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), CGST, Customs and Central Excise, Bhopal, against an order-in-original dated 26.03.2018 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise Division, Jabalpur. This appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was also rejected on 02.01.2019, being treated as barred by limitation. The petitioner's appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was filed on 26.05.2018, within two months of receiving the order on 31.12.2018, but was dismissed under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act. The present appeal was filed in 2020 and listed for admission after six years, with the arguing counsel absent.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court can consider the merits of the appeal when the appellate authority and the Tribunal have dismissed the appeals solely on the grounds of limitation, without sufficient cause for the delay being explained? The petitioner's contention, though not fully argued due to the absence of counsel, is that the appeal is liable to be admitted on a question of law. The respondent's (Revenue's) argument, as implicitly understood from the dismissal orders, is that the appeals were time-barred. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal on limitation under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act. The CESTAT also dismissed the appeal on delay, finding no sufficient cause for a delay exceeding one month.