9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 61X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... easonable. The only ground taken for the said delay is the change of lawyer. The said ground is not supported by any document nor even the affidavit of any of the lawyers to this effect has been filed. Otherwise also no circumstance has been explained by the appellant which would have prohibited him to coordinate among the lawyers or to engage the another lawyer well within time. In the given circumstances the sole reason quoted for such delay is definitely not sufficient to explain the same - Commissioner (Appeals) has committed no error while dismissing the appeal on the score of limitation itself. The Commissioner (Appeals) has a statutory mandate in view of Section 35 of CEA, 1944 to not to accept appeal if filed beyond 30 days of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7; 95364.58 on the brass items. The goods related to these shipping bills were got physically examined and majority of articles in three of the consignments were found to be the articles other than that of brass . Shri Abhishek Saxena, Manager of the appellant while getting his statement recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act has admitted that the consignment was declared as articles of brass but by mistake the articles other than that of brass got loaded from their premises to be sent to ICD PPJ. The said mistake was mentioned to have occurred due to the new staff of the appellant. It is thereafter, that a show cause notice was served upon the appellant proposing the confiscation of the goods of three of the shipping bills and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were actually brass-polished articles. Hence the allegations of mis-declaration are not attracted. It is also submitted that there was sufficient explanation given to Commissioner (Appeals) for the impugned delay of more than a month in filing appeal before him but the Commissioner (Appeals) has failed to take the same into consideration. The order under challenge is therefore prayed to be set aside. Appeal is prayed to be allowed. 4. Per-contra, it is submitted on behalf of the Department that there is admittedly, substantial delay in filing the appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). Commissioner (Appeals) is statutorily bound to not to entertain any appeal beyond a period of 90 days from the date of order challenged. Hence there is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not to accept appeal if filed beyond 30 days of the expiry of the period of 60 days from the date of receipt of order. The Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Singh Enterprises vs CCE, Jamshedpur reported in 2008 (221) ELT 163 while upholding the order of Commissioner (Appeals) dismissing the appeal on ground of limitation has clarified as follows:- 10. Sufficient cause is an expression which is found in various statutes. It essentially means as adequate or enough. There cannot be any straitjacket formula for accepting or rejecting the explanation furnished for delay caused in taking steps. In the instant case, the explanation offered for the abnormal delay of nearly 20 months is that the appellant concern was practically closed afte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
