9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the review application also without considering any of the aspect of the matter? (ii) Whether or not the Hon'ble Tribunal was right in not condoning delay in contravention of the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to decide matters on merits? (iii) Whether or not the Hon'ble Tribunal erred in law in not considering any of the grounds of appeal on merits when the issue is settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court? (iv) Whether or not the Hon'ble Tribunal erred in not following principle of natural justice and deciding the appeal on delay?" 2. Having regard to the questions referred to above, the appeal is taken up for final hearing forthwith. 3. By this appeal, the appellant seeks to challenge the legality and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that the Applicant is facing acute financial hardships and therefore, he is unable to engage the lawyer. 2. At this stage, the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue submits that the Applicant has not disclosed the reasons for delay in their application. The learned representative of the Applicant firm seeks time to explain the delay by an affidavit. In view of that, the matter is adjourned to 08.12.2015." 6. It appears that the appellant-herein in the form of a letter dated 07.12.2015 explained the circumstances, in which the appeal could not be preferred in time. 7. The sufficient cause assigned by the appellant did not find favour with the Tribunal. In such circumstances, the Tribunal declined to condone the delay and su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew of the above discussions, we reject the application for condonation of delay of filing appeal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the applicant is dismissed." 8. It appears that later, a Rectification Application No.10445 of 2016 in the Customs Appeal No.11710 of 2015, came to be filed by the appellant herein before the Tribunal. The said rectification application came to be rejected by the Tribunal vide order dated 27th March 2017, which reads thus : "Heard both sides. Ld. Advocate for the applicant/appellant submits that they wish to withdraw the Miscellaneous Application (ROM). Ld. A.R. for Revenue has no objection. 2. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application is dismissed being withdrawn." 9. It appears that the applicant t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delay, therefore, though the applicant could not make out a proper case for condoning the delay, however to meet the ends of justice, we allow the COD application subject to payment of cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid withing four weeks. Compliance to be made on 09.07.2018" 12. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and having gone through the materials on record, we are of the view that although the sufficient cause assigned may not be quite convincing, yet having regard to the merits of the main matter and also with a view to give one opportunity to the appellant to make good his case in appeal before the Tribunal, we are inclined to exercise our discretion in favour of the appellant. 13. In the result, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
