2016 (10) TMI 667 - HC - Customs

Condonation of delay in filing appeal - appeal on rejection of refund claim - Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Held that - the appellant had closed its business in December 2013, which fact is not seriously disputed, the Tribunal could have adopted a pragmatic approach. In cases of this nature, especially when the claim for refund is rejected, the assessee does not stand to lose by protracting the proceedings. Therefore, a pedantic approach is not what is warranted in this case - delay to be condoned - matter remitted to Tribunal to take up the appeal and dispose of the appeal on merits and in accordance with law.

Summary

Issues:
Delay in filing appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 challenging the refusal to condone the delay in filing the appeal.

Analysis:
The appellant filed a refund application claiming against the additional duty of Customs. The refund claim was rejected, and the appeal against it was delayed. The Tribunal refused to condone the delay due to lack of proper explanation. The appellant stated they did not receive the order in appeal and only learned about it later. The High Court noted the closure of the appellant's business and emphasized a pragmatic approach in such cases. The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Tribunal's order, and remitted the matter back to the Tribunal for condonation of delay and a decision on the appeal's merits.

This judgment primarily dealt with the issue of delay in filing an appeal under the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant's refund claim was rejected, leading to an appeal with a delay. The Court considered the reasons for the delay, including the appellant's claim of not receiving the order in appeal promptly. The Court highlighted the closure of the appellant's business and the need for a pragmatic approach in such situations. The Court emphasized that a pedantic approach was not suitable in this case, especially when the appellant had not much to lose by prolonging the proceedings. Ultimately, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Tribunal's order, and directed the Tribunal to condone the delay, take up the appeal, and decide on its merits in accordance with the law.