9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Time-barred appeal due to delay in filing. 2. Application for condonation of delay. 3. Service of Order-in-Original and compliance with Customs Act. 4. Interpretation of Section 128 of the Customs Act regarding the period of delay. Analysis: Issue 1: The primary issue in this case revolves around the time-barred appeal filed by the appellants due to a delay in submission. The appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as time-barred, leading to the present appeal before the Tribunal. Issue 2: The appellants argued that there was no delay in filing the appeal as they received a copy of the Order-in-Original only on 7-6-2005. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) found that the order had been dispatched earlier, and various methods of service had been attempted, including sending a copy to the CHA and displaying it on the Customs House notice board. Issue 3: The Tribunal examined the compliance with the Customs Act regarding the service of the Order-in-Original. It was noted that the order was properly affixed on the Customs House notice board as per Section 153(b) of the Customs Act, even if the CHA was not authorized to receive the order directly. Issue 4: The interpretation of Section 128 of the Customs Act was crucial in determining the condonable period of delay for filing the appeal. The Tribunal found that the delay was beyond the permissible period, as the appeal was filed on 2-8-2005, well after the date of service of the Order-in-Original on 14-2-2005. The Tribunal relied on a Delhi High Court judgment in a similar case to support its decision. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of complying with the prescribed timelines for filing appeals under the Customs Act. The ruling highlighted the significance of proper service of orders and the consequences of delays in filing appeals beyond the condonable period as outlined in the relevant legal provisions.
|
