9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assed by the Government in the revision preferred by the petitioner, it is averred that the order-in-appeal was received by the petitioner/appellant on 10-10-2001. The revision under Section 129DD of the Customs Act, 1962 was filed on 8-1-2002 and the same was dispatched on 8-1-2002; thereafter, the defects were pointed out by the first respondent, vide its letter dated 25-1-2002; no objection was raised with regard to the period of limitation, however, certain clarification on documents was sought for, and the petitioner complied with the same. On 22-5-2002 personal hearing was granted and on 28-6-2002, the impugned order was passed. The relevant portion of the impugned order is extracted hereunder : "3. Government has carefully cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rmer's case a Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat has even taken the view that the post office itself has to be constructed as an agent of the appellate authority. In Indian Process Chemical Laboratory's case, Raja Jois, J. has also held that the date on which payment due to an authority under an enactment is made by a cheque and sent by post should be construed as the date on which the payment is actually made. In my view, the principle enunciated in Indian Process Chemical Laboratory's case, though it was dealing with a case of payment, is equally applicable in deciding whether the appeal had been lodged on the very day the papers are entrusted to the post office. From this it follows that the appeal should be deemed to have been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ...............: (2) An application under sub-section (1) shall be made within three months from the date of the communication to the applicant of the order against which the application is being made : Provided that the Central Government may, if it is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the application within the aforesaid period or three months, allow it to be presented within a further period of three months." 7. However, in this case, I find that the revision has been dispatched on 8-1-2002, which is well within the period of limitation, and therefore, the revision filed by the petitioner should be treated as filed in time and the order of the first respondent deserves to be set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
