9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (12) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd., 2, Fair lie Place, Calcutta-700001 has filed a Revision- Petition being aggrieved from the Order No. CAL-CUS-243/82, dated 5th February, 1983 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Calcutta. The said Revision Petition was received in New Delhi Registry of the Customs, Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal on the 2nd day of December, 1982 in the form of a letter. Subsequently the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was filed. He has pleaded innocence of law and prayed that in the interests of justice if the appellant original revision petition is not considered the fresh appeal may be considered and the delay in, filing of the same may kindly be condoned as the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in the late submission of the appeal. On merit Shri Mallik has argued that the imported item is a spare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctual user. He has pleaded for acceptance of the appeal. 3. In reply Shri A.K. Deb Roy, the senior Deptt. Representative has argued that in the case of the appellant AM 79-80 Policy is not applicable and the AM Policy of 80-81 is applicable and the same is not covered under O.G.L. and he has pleaded that the appellant s imported goods falls under Appendix 30 of AM 80-81 Policy and the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ober, 1982 and this Revision Petition was transferred from Delhi to Calcutta. The revision petition was filed in wrong form in time. In view of these facts and circumstances, I hold that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in the late submission of the appeal and I condone the delay. On merits I find that the learned authorized representative s arguments do not carry any force. His ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
