2013 (8) TMI 619 - AT - Customs

Condonation of delay application was filed to condone the delay of 9 days on the ground of illness of the consultant Held that - The first appellate authority should have condoned the delay of 9 days - delay has been explained properly as to there being serious illness of Consultant appearing before him as indicated in the medical certificate been given by Doctor - They should have considered this medical certificate sympathetically and in proper perspective and should have condoned the delay orders in appeals were set aside and the appeals were remanded back to first appellate authority to reconsider the issue afresh.

Summary

Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit of Customs duty and penalties imposed on the appellants.
2. Dismissal of appeal by the first appellate authority based on delay in filing.
3. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
4. Impact of the appeal by M/s Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. on penalties imposed on other appellants.
5. Remand of appeals to the first appellate authority for reconsideration.

Analysis:

1. The judgment deals with Stay Petitions filed for the waiver of pre-deposit of Customs duty and penalties imposed on the appellants. The appellant, M/s Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., received a show cause notice demanding Customs Duty and Excise Duty, with penalties imposed on other entities under relevant provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and Central Excise Rules, 2002.

2. The first appellate authority dismissed the appeal by M/s Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. due to a delay in filing the appeal. However, upon review, it was found that the delay of 9 days was adequately explained by the appellant due to the serious illness of their consultant. The Tribunal opined that the delay should have been condoned by the first appellate authority.

3. The Tribunal, after considering the medical certificate provided by the doctor attending the consultant, concluded that the delay should have been condoned in the interest of natural justice. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, restored the appeal of M/s Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., and directed a reevaluation by the first appellate authority.

4. The judgment highlighted that the outcome of the appeal by M/s Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. would impact the penalties imposed on other appellants. Therefore, the appeals of other entities, namely M/s Heartwell Life Science and Shri Pankaj Mehta, were also remanded back to the first appellate authority for reconsideration, emphasizing the importance of following the principles of natural justice in the process.

5. In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision focused on ensuring fairness and adherence to procedural requirements in the adjudication of Customs duty and penalties. The judgment emphasized the need for a just consideration of appeals, especially concerning delays, and highlighted the interconnected nature of appeals involving multiple appellants, necessitating a comprehensive review by the first appellate authority.