ORDER
J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)
1. This application for condonation of delay was argued by Shri A. Ashokan, JDR.
2. The impugned order was communicated to the applicant Commissioner on 22-7-1998. The appeal was received in the CEGAT on 17-2-1999. In this application for condonation of delay, the following ground is given:
“The time limit for filing of this appeal was to expire on 20-10-1998. However, due to oversight/ignorance of the person delivering the documents, the copies of the appeal were submitted in the office of the Jt. Chief Departmental Representative on 14-10-1998 and an endorsement to this effect was obtained on the covering letter dated 13-10-1998 addressed to the Registrar, CEGAT, a copy of which is enclosed for ready reference. Since no communication was received from the CEGAT regarding our stay application personal enquiries were made at the office of the Assistant Registrar, CEGAT, and Joint CDR, which revealed that appeal was not filed due to non-submission of appeal copies in the office of the Assistant Registrar, CEGAT.”
3. We find it difficult to accept this reasoning. The Department has filed hundreds of appeals and this is not the first appeal to be filed by the Commissioner, Nhava Sheva. Even if the sepoy carrying the papers had filed them with the wrong office, the Commissioner’s office could have seen the endorsement and could have realised the error. This was not done for a long time. We do not find any merit in this application.
4. In the appeal papers, we find the authorisation letter to be signed by the Commissioner on 16-2-1999. If the plea was that the appeal was prepared and authorised in December, 1998, then that set of papers could have been filed before the Tribunal. The manner in which this appeal has been filed takes away the credibility of the reasons given for the delay.
5. We find that this is not a fit case for condonation. We dismiss this application. Resultantly, the appeal and the stay petition also stand dismissed.