Legal provisions involved: Central Excise Act, 1944
Judgement by: Gujarat High Court
Judge/Bench: Justice A. S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi
Facts
Shree Ukai Pradesh Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandali Ltd., a cooperative sugar factory, owed ₹1.12 crore in excise duty for May 2013 to August 2014. The demand was confirmed in July 2015. The company filed an appeal in February 2016, 98 days late, saying it was facing financial problems. CESTAT rejected the delay condonation because the company did not file an affidavit explaining the delay. After seven years, in October 2024, the company asked CESTAT to restore its application, which was again rejected.
Key legal provisions
Issues raised
Whether the High Court should interfere with CESTAT’s rejection of the restoration request.
Arguments of the case
The company argued financial difficulties and closure of operations caused the delay. They also referred to another CESTAT order where a longer delay was allowed. The State said the delay was too long, repeated, and unexplained.
Judgement
The Court agreed with CESTAT. It said the company repeatedly neglected its appeal, did not properly explain the delay, and financial hardship was just an excuse. Closure of operations does not justify ignoring legal proceedings. The petition was dismissed.
Click here to VIEW the full judgement.
