9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1670X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the applicant could not file the application with the Government on time because the file pertaining to present case was unfortunately misplaced in their office. The reason adduced by the applicant is manifestly very vague, casual and cannot be considered as sufficient cause which prevented them from filing the instant revision application on time as keeping the documents was entirely within their control. The applicant has not explained which document was missing because of which revision application could not be filed in time - the applicant’s case is not covered by the term ‘sufficient cause’ as is envisaged in Section 35EE and, therefore, the Government does not consider it serving case for condonation of delay. Hence the applicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Secretary ORDER A Revision Application No. 375/33/DBK/2014-RA, dated 14-10-2014 has been filed by M/s. J. S. Designer Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as applicant) against the order No. CC(A)Cus-432/2014, dated 26-3-2014, passed by Commissioner (Appeals), New Delhi. Besides that applicant has also filed an application for condonation of delay of 89 days for the reason that the documents were misplaced in their office and due to that the revision application could not be filed or time. 2. Brief fact of the case are that the applicant had filed a shipping bill for the export of ladies knitted blouse and claimed the classification under CTH 6106 03A. On examination of the goods, it was observed by the adjudicating authority vide it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. As per sub-section (2) of Section 35EE of Central Excise Act, 1944, a revision application can be filed only within 3 months from the date of communication of the Commissioner (Appeal) s order. Further, the delay of 90 days in filing the revision application can be condoned by the Government on the ground that the applicant was prevented by any sufficient cause from filing the revision application in time. The applicant has stated in their condonation of delay application that the applicant could not file the application with the Government on time because the file pertaining to present case was unfortunately misplaced in their office. The reason adduced by the applicant is manifestly very vague, casual and cannot be considered as suffic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wever, reliance on Public Notice is not sufficient here and the classification of applicant product is to be determined by the actual make, dimensions, size and other features of the products only. All these criteria of the products exported were examined by original adjudicating authority and he has arrived at the conclusion after seeing the sample of the products that these are not blouses as claimed by the applicant. He has expressly noted that the garment under reference neither have the opening in the neckline nor the garment is of very low cut. Accordingly, the Dy. Commissioner has concluded that the exported garment are not blouses classifiable under CTH 6106 03A and are other garment s falling under CTH 6114. The sample of the expor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
