9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (10) TMI 182 - AT - CustomsCondonation of delay in filing appeal - power of Commissioner (Appeals) to condone delay - HELD THAT - The Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) has noted that an Appeal under section 128 of the Act is required to be filed within a period of 60 days from the date of communication of the order but it can be presented within a further period of 30 days if the Commissioner (Appeals) is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the Appeal within the aforesaid period. The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the present Appeal was presented even after the extended period of 30 days. A Division Bench of this Tribunal in Diamond Construction vs. Commissioner of Customs, Excise and Service Tax, Jabalpur, 2019 (2) TMI 1822 - CESTAT NEW DELHI has held that the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot condone any delay if the Appeal is presented beyond 30 days after the expiry of 60 days. The Commissioner (Appeals) committed no illegality in dismissing the Appeal - appeal rightly dismissed.
Issues:
- Timeliness of filing an Appeal under section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI dealt with an Appeal challenging the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) dismissing the Appeal as it was filed beyond the prescribed period under section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that an Appeal must be filed within 60 days from the date of communication of the order, with a provision for an additional 30 days if sufficient cause is shown. However, in this case, the Appeal was presented even after the extended period of 30 days. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision in Diamond Construction vs. Commissioner of Customs, Excise and Service Tax, Jabalpur, which held that the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot condone any delay if the Appeal is filed beyond 30 days after the initial 60-day period. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the Commissioner (Appeals) did not act unlawfully in dismissing the Appeal due to the delay in filing. The judgment emphasized the strict adherence to the statutory timelines for filing Appeals under section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. As a result, the Appeal was deemed liable to be dismissed and was accordingly dismissed by the Tribunal. The decision highlights the importance of complying with the statutory timelines and the limited scope for condonation of delays in filing Appeals under the Customs Act, 1962.
|
