Asst. Commissioner vs Mr. Anil Kohli Irp/Rp Of M/S. Dunar Foods ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.282 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The tribunal's reasoning rests on two principles: first, that a bare assertion of late knowledge of an impugned order, unsupported by any relevant material, does not establish sufficient cause for condoning delay; and second, that the fact that the appellant is a government department does not, of itself, furnish a reason for condoning inordinate delay. Where a delay of 1142 days is unexplained by such material, an application for condonation of that delay is to be dismissed, and the appeal rejected accordingly.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Asst. Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax Division-II ...Appellant
Versus
Anil Kohli, IRP/RP, Dunar Foods Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Ms. Anushree Narain and Ms. Simran Kumari, Advocates. For Respondent: Mr. Abhishek Anand, Mr. Karan Kohli, Ms. Jasleen Singh Sandha, Advocates for RP.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
16.02.2024: This Appeal has been filed against the order dated
26.11.2019, the appeal has been filed on 09.02.2023. Learned counsel for
the Appellant submits that the Appellants were not aware of the order and
they came to know about the order on 05.07.2021 and thereafter they took
legal opinion and filed the appeal on 09.02.2023.
2. The order impugned was passed on 26.11.2019 and the submission of
the Appellant that they came to know about the order on 05.07.2021 is not
based on any relevant material. It is the case of the Appellant itself that they
came to know on 05.07.2021 and appeal was filed on 09.02.2023, it took
about one and a half year for the Appellant to file an appeal. Merely because
Cont'd.../ -2-
the appeal has been filed by a government department cannot be reason for
inordinate delay.
3. We, thus, are of the view that Application for Condonation of Delay filed
by the Appellant praying for condonation of 1142 days' delay cannot be
allowed. We also take notice of the fact that these appeals which are filed
with inordinate delay are unnecessarily filed to burden the Registry of the
Court. We dismiss the Delay Condonation Application. Memo of Appeal is
rejected.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.282 of 2024
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free