2017 (12) TMI 38 - AT - Customs

Condonation of delay of 555 days in filing appeal before Tribunal - parties to proceedings - Section 129 A of the Customs Act 1962 - Held that - right to appeal before the Tribunal is for an aggrieved persons against an order passed by the Authority - In the case in hand the impugned Order-in-Appeal No.HYD-CUS-000-APP-162 & 163-15-16 dated 29.02.2016 is indicating that appellant before 1st Appellate Authority is Smt Elete Susheela and not the applicant in this application. Application filed by applicant to condone the delay in filing the appeal, is devoid of merits, as appeal of Shri E. Ram Reddy itself is not maintainable before the Tribunal - application for COD dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Condonation of delay in filing appeal before the Tribunal under the Customs Act.

In this judgment, the issue revolves around the condonation of delay in filing an appeal before the Tribunal under the Customs Act. The applicant sought condonation of a 555-day delay in filing an appeal against an Order-in-Appeal where gold bangles were confiscated. The applicant, represented by Mr. E. Ram Reddy, claimed to be aggrieved by the adjudicating authority's decision. The applicant argued that the right to appeal was conferred by a Supreme Court judgment, allowing parties to appeal as aggrieved persons. However, the Tribunal examined the provisions of Section 129A of the Customs Act, which specify who can appeal before the Tribunal. The section permits only aggrieved persons affected by specific orders to appeal, such as decisions by the Principal Commissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Customs. The Tribunal noted that the impugned order indicated that the appellant before the 1st Appellate Authority was not the applicant in this case, leading to the conclusion that the appeal by the applicant was not maintainable before the Tribunal. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay was dismissed, and the appeal was also dismissed.

This judgment clarifies the scope of the right to appeal before the Tribunal under the Customs Act. It emphasizes that only aggrieved persons affected by specific orders, as outlined in Section 129A, have the right to appeal. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of the appellant being the aggrieved party directly impacted by the order under appeal. The judgment underscores the need for strict adherence to statutory provisions governing appeals, ensuring that only eligible parties can seek redress through the appellate process. The decision serves as a reminder that the right to appeal is contingent upon meeting the statutory requirements set out in the Customs Act, reinforcing the principle of legal precision and adherence to procedural rules in seeking appellate relief.