ARUN SMELTERS LIMITED Vs. CESTAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is filed seeking for the relief of issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the file C/COD/106/2005 and C/163/2005 of the first respondent culminating in the final order No. 377/2006., and Miscellaneous Order No. 221/2006 dated 1-5-2006 and quash the same, direct the first respondent to hear the Appeal filed by the petitioner herein on merits.

(2.) The first respondent-Tribunal by its order dated 1-5-2006 dismissed the application filed by the petitioner for condonation of delay of 22 days in filing the appeal on the premise that a responsible Officer of the petitioner- Company has stated that he was away from Madras during the period from 16-1-2006 to 18-2-2006 in the affidavit filed in support of the said application, but the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said dates have to be read as 16-1-2005 and 18-2-2005 cannot be accepted and the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that they were not able to read the dates as suggested by the counsel for the petitioner inasmuch as the dates are mentioned by the deponent in his affidavit in a responsible manner.

(3.) Learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the respondents has reiterated the above reasoning given by the Tribunal.