ORDER
TM. P. Nambiar, Member
1. The condonation of delay application has been filed for condoning the delay in filing the appeals before the Tribunal. The impugned order was served on them on 9.11.92. But the appeals have been filed before Tribunal on 6.2.98, i.e. after a period of more than five years.
2. Shir KVS Phanichander, learned Counsel for the appellants reiterated the para 2 to of the condonation of delay application averments which reads as follows:
2) I crave leave of this Hon’ble Court to go through my grounds of appeal and treat the same as part and parcel of this affidavit.
3) I humbly submit that my father was running a business of customs notified shop namely-“FUJI INTERNATIONAL” at Nellore and was duly and regularly paying the customs duty. I further submit that on 12.11.1990, the Senior Superintendent of Central Excise, H.D. Preventive, Guntur, along with his officials visited my resident and seized certain foreign goods incorporated in the Inventory dt. 30.11.1990 on the ground that customs duty has not been paid to them. I further submit that after seizing the foreign goods worth nearly Rs. 20,000/- the Senior Superintendent along with his officials went to the Customs Notified Shop, namely “FUJI INTERNATIONAL” which belongs to my father and seized foreign goods worth nearly Rs. 79,000/- and incorporated in the Inventory dt. 14.11.1990 on the ground that the customs duty has not been paid and also seized Dollar 2707 kept in a white cover kept in the said shop.
4) I further submit that the respondent officials has issued summons dt. 1.12.1990 by various methods to me, my father and brother. Since my father was seriously ill and bedridden and continuously hospitalised, I and my brother had to constantly attend to our father’s medical care and were not able to appear before the authorities on the prescribed dates.
5) I further submit subsequently I have filed my objections and denied all the averments made by them and finally on 11.9.1992 the respondent without considering my replies given to show-cause notice dt. 14.5.91 passed order in adjudication No. 17/92 whereby he ordered and imposed a penalty of Rs. 20,000/-.
6) I further submit before this Hon’ble court that my father was continuously bedridden and hospitalised and only recently he has recovered from the illness. In view of the foregoing reasons we could not be able to prefer and appeal against the impugned order within the limitation.
It was contended by him that the father of the appellants, v. Shri Subbarayulu was under treatment. He was suffering from heart ailment. Therefore, the other appellants were looking after him during the course of these 6 years. He, therefore, pointed out that the disease of the father of the appellants who was suffering from heart disease is sufficient cause for not filing the appeal for more than 2190 days. He, therefore, pointed out that this is fit case for condoning the delay of 2190 days and the delay should be condoned in view of the fact that Shri Subbarayulu himself was suffering and his sons were engaged due to the illness of their father who was suffering from heart disease. He also stated that Shri Sheikh Abbas, retired Supdt. of Central Excise took the brief from the appellants to appear before the appropriate authority to conduct the case and he conducted the case. But he was an informer and he received the remuneration from the Govt. in this regard. He, therefore, stated that there is sufficient cause made out for condoning the delay.
3. Heard Shri Rama Rao, the learned DR. He stated that sufficient ground has not been made out for condonation of the long delay.
4. I have considered the submissions made before me. It is now seen that it is for the applicants to establish that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeals in time. The only reason given is that Shri Subbarayulu, was suffering from heart ailment and he was under the care of the appellants and the appellants were engaged. In my view this is not a sufficient cause for condoning the delay of six years. It is unthinkable that due to heart ailment of their father, all these appellants will remain in the Hospital for the services of their father continuously for six years and they could not get any time to file the appeals. In my view there is absolutely no case made out for condonation of this inordinate delay. The COD applications are dismissed and consequently, the stay petitions and the appeals also stand dismissed.
Dictated and pronounced in open court