Per Shri V.P. Gulati :

The prayer in the application is for condonation of the delay of 27 days in filing the appeal beyond the stipulated period of 3 months provided in the statute. The reason given for the delay in filing the appeal is as under:

The Department had to take up review of Orders passed by CEGAT on priority and due to constraints of Staff and man power etc., the review of this order in Appeal No. 240/96 dated 6.12.1996 got delayed.

It has also been urged that for the purpose of construing sufficient cause for condoning the delay, liberal view should be taken in the interest of advancing the cause of justice and that the term sufficient cause is an elastic term and should be interpreted so.

2. The learned JDR for the department has reiterated this submissions made in the appeal memorandum for condoning the delay.

3. None is present for the respondents.

4. We observe that the plea taken for condoning the delay is there was constraints of staff and man power for the purpose of reviewing the order. Apart from the ipsi dixit no basis has been laid in the application to substantiate as to how the constraints of man power came in the way of the appeal being filed within time. The reason of staff shortage can be considered as one of the reasons while considering condonation of delay. But it is to be shown with facts and figures that in a given case there was indeed sudden handicap of shortage of staff and on account of the manner in which the department fills up the vacancies etc., the matter could not be handled expeditiously for filing the appeal within the stipulated period as prescribed in the statute. No facts in this regard have been placed before us. Without laying any basis, therefore, the plea of the revenue that a liberal view should be taken and that the terms sufficient cause should be treated as an elastic expression cannot be entertained. We observe, the concept of elasticity would only apply where a circumstance is made out and a plea in that regard is made. In the present case no such circumstance has been made out based on any facts and, therefore, in our view the department has failed to show sufficient cause for condoning the delay in question.

5. We, therefore, dismiss the condonation of delay application. In as much as the delay has not been condoned, the appeal is also dismissed.