SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.
Pr. Commissioner Central Excise Delhi I - Appellant
Versus
Design Dialogues India Pvt. Ltd. - Respondents
Civil Appeal Diary No(s). 14338 of 2020 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 20-05-2019 in EA No. 54416 of 2015 passed by the Custom Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal), (IA No.99583 of 2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.99582 of 2020-STAY APPLICATION and IA No.99581 of 2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING APPEAL) WITH Diary No(s). 13084 of 2020 (XVII-A), (IA No. 83444 of 2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.83446 of 2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.83445 of 2020-EX-PARTE STAY), Diary No(s). 15831 of 2020 (XVII-A), ( IA No.83755 of 2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.83756 of 2020-STAY APPLICATION and IA No.83751 of 2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING APPEAL)
Decided on : 29-06-2021
Special leave petition – Civil Appeal – Impugned order was passed by CESTAT and proposal is stated to have been sent by applicant to Ministry of Finance, after six months – Plea raised by learned counsel for petitioner is that similar matters are pending in Civil Appeal and other connected matters – Held, If it has not been done, then an inquiry must be held, responsibility fixed and action taken against officers be placed before us – Learned Additional Solicitor General requests time to complete process – Court may only note that it has taken a year’s delay apart from period to file special leave petition and now further are required to complete action against officers concerned – So much for anxiety about revenue – Ordered Accordingly.
ORDER :
1. The impugned order was passed by the CESTAT on 20-05-2019 and the proposal is stated to have been sent by the applicant to the Ministry of Finance on 06-01-2020, after six months.
2. The plea raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that similar matters are pending in Civil Appeal No. 6550/2015 and other connected matters.
3. Merely because similar matters are pending is not a ground to grant leave and take the matter when the authorities have been negligent in filing the appeal. We have repeatedly emphasized that unless the case is brought within the parameters of Chief Post Master General & Ors. v. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr.- (2012) 3 SCC 563, we would not be inclined to condone the delay and have in fact dismissed the special leave petitions with cost categorizing them as “certificate cases” only brought before the Court to complete a formality and save the skin of the officers concerned.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that more than Rs. 5 Crores is at stake. If that be, the authorities should recover it from the officer concerned.
5. Before we proceed with the application further, we would like to know the steps which have been taken by the appellant against the officers concerned!
6. If it has not been done, then an inquiry must be held, responsibility fixed and the action taken against the officers be placed before us.
7. The learned Additional Solicitor General requests for three months’ time to complete the process.
8. We may only note that it has taken a year’s delay apart from the 90 days period to file the special leave petition and now three months further are required to complete action against the officers concerned. So much for the anxiety about the revenue!
9. List on 03-09-2021.
Timeliness in filing appeals must be adhered to; negligence does not justify delay.
Timely action, inquiry, and responsibility fixing are crucial in cases of revenue delay.
Delays in filing appeals must be satisfactorily explained; inadequate reasons result in dismissal of applications for condonation.
Adherence to the period of limitation and discouragement of casual approach by government and public authorities in filing petitions with the Supreme Court.
Points Of Law : Leeway which was given to Government/public authorities on account of innate inefficiencies was the result of certain orders of this Court which came at a time when technology had not....
Points Of Law : Leeway which was given to Government/public authorities on account of innate inefficiencies was the result of certain orders of this Court which came at a time when technology had not....
Points Of Law : Leeway which was given to Government/public authorities on account of innate inefficiencies was result of certain orders of this Court which came at a time when technology had not adv....
Leeway which was given to the Government/public authorities on account of innate inefficiencies was result of certain orders of this Court which came at a time when technology had not advanced and th....
State Governments and public authorities are bound to honour period of limitation while approaching Supreme Court.
The court emphasized the accountability of State-Authorities for inaction and held that the impersonal machinery of the government cannot be used as a ground for condonation of delay.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.