9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Commr. of Customs (Appeals). The preamble of the order itself is very clear, it mentions the date of issue as 6-7-2006 i.e. apparently the date of the communication of the order. It is irrelevant, under what circumstances and how the appellants had paid the dues against the assessed bill of entry, but it is relevant, in filing appeal, the date of communication of the order. In our opinion, the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mitted that the ld. Commr. (Appeals) has not decided the issue on merit but rejected their appeal as time barred. The ld. Advocate further submitted that the relevant Bill of Entry No. 263382, dated 14-12-2005 though assessed on 7-2-2006 and consequently the dues ware paid by them on 1-3-2006 to avoid demurrage etc., however, they had requested for a speaking assessment order. The ld. Advocate fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... barred by limitation. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. We have seen the order-in-Original, which refers to two dates i.e. date of order as 7-2-2006 and the date of issue as 6-7-2006. The order is passed by the Joint Commissioner of Customs, Customs House, Kolkata, against which the appellant has preferred appeal before the ld. Commr. of Customs (Appeals). The preamble of the order i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
