9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 704X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e also, we observe that the writ-petition was filed by one Shri Stanley Fernandes. The said petitioner though was consignor but apparently he is not appellant nor as is apparently the co-noticee of the appellant in the impugned show cause notice No. 3007 dated 07 February 2018. Also there is no order been passed against him as is apparent from the impugned order dated 30 January 2019. For this reason also the pendency of said writ-petition does not seem to extend any benefit to the present applicant who is none but the importer and the proposed allegation of mis-declaration on his part that too to the extent of importing 43020 pieces of memory card serve 4 GB and 8 GB quantity under the garb of three battery UPS, is not available to him. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined the extent of financial burden as has rather been caused due to said delay. The same is accordingly prayed to be condoned. Learned Departmental Representative while rebutting the said submission stated that the reason quoted is not at all sufficient to explain the delay of as many as 110 days. It is brought to the notice that the writ-petition which has been taken shelter for the purpose was not even the petition of the appellant nor of any of the co-noticees. The request of condonation of delay based on the said writ-petition is prayed to be rejected. The application is accordingly rejected. 3. After hearing both the parties, we are of the opinion as follows :- Admittedly the order which has been challenged in the impugned a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s-declaration on his part that too to the extent of importing 43020 pieces of memory card serve 4 GB and 8 GB quantity under the garb of three battery UPS, is not available to him. 5. In the given circumstances and the confirmation of the proposal of confiscation and the imposition of penalty upon the appellant, we are not inclined to accept the reason quoted to be a sufficient cause. More so, for the reason that the order under challenge also given the importer an opportunity for paying redemption fine. The applicant is miserably silent about seeking the said option. Seen from any angle, the reason mentioned by the applicant is held to not to be the sufficient cause to explain the 110 days delay. Accordingly, the Condonation of Delay is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
