- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11670 WP No. 36546 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.36546 OF 2024 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S. ESSENTRA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, (A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND ALSO UNDER THE PROVISION OF CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944), 3RD FLOOR, NO.302 OF NO.20, HMT MAIN ROAD, BRIGADE RUBIX, BENGALURU - 560 013. (REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SHRI.SWAROOP S, S/O. SURYANARAYANA ACHANGI RAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS). …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHIDANANDA URS B G., ADVOCATE) AND: ADDITIONAL SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE), 14, HUDCO VISHAL BLDG., B WING, 6TH FLOOR, Digitally signed by CHAITHRA P Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11670 WP No. 36546 of 2024 BHIKAJI KAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI - 110 066. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.AKASH B SHETTY, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO i) QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED BY RESPONDENT IN REVISION APPLICATION VIDE ORDER NO.08-09/2024-CS DATED 15/03/2024 WHICH IS HEREWITH ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE -H AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11670 WP No. 36546 of 2024 ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioner sought for the following reliefs: (i) Quash the impugned orders passed by Respondent in Revision Application vide order No.195/8182/SZ/2019- RA dated 25.03.2019 which is herewith enclosed as ANNEXURE "H" and is direct the Respondent authority to hear the Appeal on merits by condoning the delay in filing the appeal which is within the condonable period and restore the appeals. (ii) Pass any other order or give any other direction as this Honorable Court deems fit and appropriate in the circumstances of the case. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that in the first instance, Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax passed an order dated 23.01.2018 rejecting the claim of the petitioner in a sum of Rs.5,51,126/- for a period of September-2016 to December-2016. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred appeals before the Appellate Authority. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11670 WP No. 36546 of 2024 The Appellate Authority proceeded to dismiss the said appeals vide order dated 07.08.2018, which was served upon the petitioner. 4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 07.08.2018, the petitioner filed revision application under Section 35EE of the Central Excise Act, 1944, before the Revisionary Authority along with application for condonation of delay of 87 days in filing the revision application. By the impugned order, the Revision Authority proceeded to reject the application filed for condoning the delay of 87 days in filing the revision application and consequently dismissed the revision application by passing the impugned order at Annexure-H dated 15.03.2024, which is assailed in the present petition. 5. A perusal of the impugned order dated 15.03.2024 passed by Revisionary Authority will indicate that the Revisionary Authority has failed to consider and appreciate that while considering application for condonation of delay, it is not the length of time but reasons assigned by the petitioner-applicant for seeking condonation of delay should be considered. 6. In the instant case, the petitioner specifically contended that due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:11670 WP No. 36546 of 2024 circumstances and sufficient cause including non-receipt of impugned order and relevant records, which were necessary for the purpose of preferring the revision application/petition, the petitioner was unable to file revision application within condonable period of limitation. 7. Under these circumstances, adopting justice oriented approach and in order to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to prosecute revision application/petition on merits, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order at Annexure-H dated 15.03.2024 and allow application for condonation of delay filed by the petitioner and remit the matter back to the respondent for re-consideration afresh the revision application/petition on merits in accordance with law. 8. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) Writ petition is allowed; (ii) Impugned order at Annexure-H dated 15.03.2024 is set aside; the application for condoning the delay of 87 days in filing the revision - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:11670 WP No. 36546 of 2024 application/petition by the petitioner before the respondent is hereby allowed; (iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent for re-consideration of revision application/petition on merits without reference to delay, which stands condoned in favour of the petitioner by virtue of this order. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21