(Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Indira Banerjee and Sanjiv Khanna, JJ.)
Civil Appeal No. of 2021 (D No. 20008 of 2020), decided on January 28, 2021
Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax Kolkata ______________________________________________ Appellant;
v.
S.K. Samanta and Co. Pvt. Ltd. ______________________ Respondent.
With
Civil Appeal No. of 2021
(D No. 19601 of 2020)
Civil Appeal No. of 2021
(D No. 20017 of 2020)
Civil Appeal No. of 2021 (D No. 20008 of 2020); Civil Appeal No. of 2021 (D No. 19601 of 2020); and Civil Appeal No. of 2021 (D No. 20017 of 2020)
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. These appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the decisions of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 19 September 2018, 17 July 2018 and 19 September 2018 with a delay of 668 days, 727 days and 668 days, respectively.
2. We have heard Mr. Sanjay Jain and Mr. Balbir Singh, learned Additional Solicitors General, in support of the appeals. It has been submitted that the delay occurred on account of the fact that the appeals were mistakenly filed before the Calcutta High Court.
3. Even if the period of time which was spent in pursuing the appeals before the High Court is excluded, there is still a substantial and unexplained delay. Even otherwise, we are of the view that the Union of India, which has competent legal advice at its command, cannot, particularly in the facts of the present case, be heard to contend that they were under a mis-apprehension that the appeals would lie before the High Court. The nature of the controversy involved in the appeals leaves no manner of doubt, that the appeals were maintainable before this Court and this Court alone. Hence, we are not inclined to condone such a gross delay on the part of the Revenue in accessing its remedies before the court. In a matter such as the present, certainty in fiscal matters is of importance to the assessee just as the interests of the Revenue have to be duly protected. The concerns of the Revenue have to be duly met by showing alacrity in pursuing remedies which are available in law.
4. Since the appeals are not being entertained on the ground of delay, we expressly clarify that we have not enquired into the issues of law which have been addressed in the present appeals.
5. The appeals are accordingly dismissed on the ground of delay.
CIVIL APPEAL Diary No(s). 20008/2020
Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax Kolkata ________________________________________________ Appellant
v.
S.K. Samanta and Co. Pvt. Ltd ________________________ Respondent
(WITH IA No. 105225/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No. 105227/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No. 105226/2020-STAY APPLICATION)
CIVIL APPEAL Diary No(s). 19601/2020
(WITH IA No. 103085/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No. 103087/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No. 103086/2020-STAY APPLICATION)
CIVIL APPEAL Diary No(s). 20017/2020
(WITH IA No. 105314/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No. 105313/2020-STAY APPLICATION and IA No. 105311/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING APPEAL
Date : 28-01-2021 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
(Before Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Indira Banerjee and Sanjiv Khanna, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG
Mr. Balbir Singh, ASG
Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, Adv.
Ms. Swati Ghildyal, Adv.
Mr. Anirudh Bakhru Adv.
Mr. Shyam Gopal, Adv.
Mr. B.V. Balram Das, Adv.
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR
For Respondent(s)
Ms. Shruti Agarwal, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
6. The appeals are dismissed on the ground of delay in terms of the signed order.
———
