9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 645X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on merit without going into the question of limitation. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Customs Appeal No.77480 of 2019 - FINAL ORDER NO. 75222/2020 - Dated:- 3-2-2020 - HON BLE MR. S.S.GARG, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND HON BLE MR.P.VENKATA SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Ms.Rakhi Purnima Paul, Advocate for the Appellant Shri S.Guha, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER PER S.S.GARG : The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 17.09.2018 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant as time barred without going into the merits of the case. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The said appeal was filed after a period of 112 days and the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the said appeal as time barred because the delay under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962, can be condoned by the Commissioner (Appeals) upto 30 days beyond 60 days. But in the present appeal, there was a delay of 22 days after the statutory period. Accordingly, by relying on the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises Vs. CCEx., Jamshedpur reported in 2008 (221) ELT 163 (S.C.), the Commissioner (Appeals) held that he cannot condone the delay beyond 30 days and consequently, dismissed the appeal as time barred. Thereafter, the appellant filed a Writ Petition beari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00/-, the matter needs to be remanded back with a direction to decide the matter on merits. 5. On the other hand, the Ld.D.R. for the Revenue, defended the impugned order and reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 6. After considering the submission of both sides and on perusal of materials on record, we find that by the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal being time barred because the same was filed after a period of 112 days whereas it should have been filed within 60 days and the Commissioner (Appeals) has got power to condone upto 30 days. The Division Bench of the Hon ble High Court of Calcutta, has condoned the delay and directed us to decide all the points on merits. Since the appeal ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
