9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 683X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order]. - Heard the argument of Mr. C. Saravanan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Vijay Karthikeyan, learned Senior Standing Counsel, who is taking notice for the respondents. 2. The Writ Petition is directed against the order dated 16-7-2007 passed by the second respondent, viz., the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Thoothukudi, made in O.I.O. No. 175 of 2007. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellate authority rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner on the ground that it was filed beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 128 of the Act. Thereafter, for curious reasons, the petitioner moved the South Zonal Bench of the Customs, Excise arid Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The Appellate Tribunal, by order dated 10-8-2009, rejected the appeal stating that i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e further delay of three months. Therefore, the petitioner cannot even avail such remedy, having admittedly gone before the wrong forum beyond the limitation period. Therefore, he prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petition. 5. Further, Mr. C. Saravanan, learned counsel for the petitioner referred to a decision of this Court passed in W.P. Nos. 3325 and 3326 of 2005, dated 21-4-2005. In that c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he delay or such appeals are not filed within the limitation period prescribed under the Act, certainly a power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be exercised for waiving such statutory limitation. Instead of doing justice, it will be derailing the law made by the Parliament. The petitioner has not made out any case for exercising the extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
