2007 (8) TMI 536 - AT - Customs

Appeal to Commissioner (Appeals) - Time Limitation - Service of order - Held that - a similar factual situation was considered by the Hon ble Madras High Court (Division Bench) in the case of P. Bhoormal Tirupati v. Additional Collector of Customs, Madras 1973 (8) TMI 45 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS and it was held that a show-cause notice issued to the party by the customs authorities, duly addressed and despatched by registered-post under Section 153 of the Customs Act and returned undelivered must be deemed to have been served on them inasmuch as it was not proved to the contrary - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal hit by limitation.
2. Validity of show-cause notice issued after final assessment.
3. Imposition of penalty on the appellant for misdeeds of agents.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against an order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), where three issues were considered. The first issue was whether the appeal was time-barred. The Order-in-Original was dispatched to the appellant but returned undelivered. The appellant argued that they did not receive the order, relying on legal precedents. The Commissioner (Appeals) found the appeal time-barred based on Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, and the Tribunal upheld this decision, citing a similar case from the Madras High Court. The judgment highlighted the importance of proper service of notice and dismissed the appeal due to being beyond the condonable period of delay.

2. The second issue concerned the validity of a show-cause notice issued after a final assessment under Section 17 of the Customs Act. The appellant had imported machines declared as 'computerized embroidery pattern-making machines' seeking exemption under a specific Customs Notification. Customs authorities alleged misdeclaration and issued a show-cause notice for differential duty, confiscation, and penalty. The Joint Commissioner confirmed the demand and imposed a penalty on the appellant. The Tribunal dismissed this issue due to the appeal being time-barred, rendering the discussion on the show-cause notice validity irrelevant.

3. The third issue involved the imposition of a penalty on the appellant for the misdeeds of their agents without showing any mala fides against the appellant. The Tribunal did not delve into this issue as the appeal was dismissed on the grounds of being time-barred. The judgment referenced a ruling from the Delhi High Court, emphasizing that an appeal beyond the condonable period of delay must be dismissed, making the decision on the penalty issue inconsequential.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision that the appeal was time-barred, rendering the discussions on the show-cause notice validity and penalty imposition irrelevant. The judgment highlighted the importance of timely filing appeals and proper service of notices in customs cases, citing legal precedents to support the decision.