bgp bgp bgp IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE OF MOTION NO.931 OF 2007 OF MOTION NO.931 OF 2007 OF MOTION NO.931 OF 2007 WITH WITH WITH CENTRAL CENTRAL CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL (L) NO.11 OF 2007 EXCISE APPEAL (L) NO.11 OF 2007 EXCISE APPEAL (L) NO.11 OF 2007 The Commisioner of Central Excise ..Appellant Vs. Shri.Ramswaroop Jajoo & Ors. ..Respondents Mrs.S.V.Bharucha, P.A. Vyas & S.D.Bhosale for the Appellant. None for the Respondents. CORAM CORAM CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & SANTOSH SANTOSH SANTOSH BORA, JJ. BORA, JJ. BORA, JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 25TH APRIL, 2008 : 25TH APRIL, 2008 : 25TH APRIL, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant. None appeared for the Respondents. By this Notice of Motion, the Appellant is seeking condonation of 253 days’ delay caused in filing the Appeal. The prescribed period for filing the Appeal is 180 days. Over and above the aforesaid period, 253 days delay has occurred. The reasons for causing such delay are given in paragraph No.2 of the Affidavit-in-support of the Notice of Motion, which reads as under: 2. I say that the last date of filing the above Appeal was 08/05/2006 but the same was however filed on 16/01/2007. As such there is a delay of 253 days in filing the Appeal. This delay has occurred because certain documents and proceedings like reply to show cause notice, Memo of Appeal filed by Respondents are required to be annexed to present Appeal could not be traced and were not available and the same had to be obtained from Respondents. I say that no prejudice will be caused to the Respondent, if the delay is condoned and the matter is disposed of on merits. In the alternative, the Revenue will be greatly prejudiced by the loss of an effective remedy available under the state. After due and diligent search of the papers and after obtaining certain Exhibits from the Assessee’s we have been able to file this Appeal. 2. We find the above explanation totally bereft of details and particulars The same are totally unsatisfactory. We are not inclined to condone the delay caused in filing the above Appeal. Hence, the Notice of Motion stands dismissed. 3. In view of dismissal of the Notice of Motion, the above Appeal also stands dismissed. (SANTOSH (SANTOSH (SANTOSH BORA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) BORA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) BORA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)