2015 (12) TMI 1140 - AT - Customs

Bar of limitation in filing appeal before Commissioner (appeals) - date of communication of order - Held that - The order is passed by the Joint Commissioner of Customs, Customs House, Kolkata, against which the appellant has preferred appeal before the ld. Commr. of Customs (Appeals). The preamble of the order itself is very clear, it mentions the date of issue as 6-7-2006 i.e. apparently the date of the communication of the order. It is irrelevant, under what circumstances and how the appellants had paid the dues against the assessed bill of entry, but it is relevant, in filing appeal, the date of communication of the order. In our opinion, the date of communication of the order passed by the Joint Commissioner of Customs as per Board s Circular No. 16/2003-Cus., dated 17-3-2003, is the relevant date of issue i.e. 6-7-2006 mentioned in the said order for filing the appeal under Section 128(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. No merit in impugned order - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal filed against Order-in-Appeal on grounds of limitation.
2. Interpretation of relevant dates in the order-in-Original.
3. Determination of the relevant date for filing an appeal under Section 128(1) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed challenging Order-in-Appeal No. KOL/CUS/CKP/195/2006 on the basis that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) rejected the appeal as time-barred without deciding the issue on merit. The appellant argued that the appeal was filed within the prescribed period of limitation under Section 128(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, as the speaking assessment order was communicated to them on 6th July, 2006, and the appeal was filed on 30-8-2006. The appellant contended that the date of communication of the order is crucial for calculating the limitation period.

2. The Tribunal examined the order-in-Original, noting two significant dates: the date of order as 7-2-2006 and the date of issue as 6-7-2006. The Tribunal emphasized that the date of communication of the order is pivotal for determining the limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 128(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. Regardless of when the dues were paid by the appellant, the date of communication of the order is the relevant date for filing an appeal. The Tribunal referred to Board Circular No. 16/2003-Cus., dated 17-3-2003, to support this interpretation. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the appeal was not time-barred, setting aside the impugned order and remitting the case back to the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) for a fresh decision on merit.

3. The Revenue argued that the payment of dues by the appellant indicated that they were aware of the assessment order and could have filed the appeal from the date of communication. However, the Tribunal held that the date of communication of the order, as per the Board's Circular, is crucial for determining the limitation period for filing an appeal. As the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) did not decide the issue on merit, the Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing and keeping all issues open for consideration.

This detailed analysis highlights the key legal points and the Tribunal's reasoning in the judgment, focusing on the interpretation of dates, the relevance of the communication of the order, and the procedural aspects of filing an appeal within the prescribed limitation period under the Customs Act, 1962.