9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1130X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated matter which was the cause of initiation of action in these proceedings has now been remanded by the Tribunal to the Commissioner, the final order does not become invalid and we find no ground to recall our final order and restore this appeal. It also needs to be pointed out that the action against the appellant was initiated based on a letter of Commissioner of Customs, Kandla dated 3.12.2010 addressed to the Commissioner, Jodhpur and NOT based on any Order-in-Original passed by any Commissioner. Consequent upon the investigation by DRI a show cause notice came to be issued to the exporter M/s Dadi Impex. During investigation, it came to light that the applicant/appellant before us acted as CHA and in discharging his functions, vio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tailed order was passed on 09.08.2016 recording the reasons and holding that there was no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Commissioner and rejecting the appeal. 3. The present application has been filed on 25.01.2023 more than six years after the final order was passed. Learned counsel for the appellant fairly admits that the final order was passed on merits after hearing both sides and recording the reasons. He however, submits there was a parallel proceeding regarding the alleged violation by the exporter - M/s Dadi Impex Pvt. Ltd. Based on the alleged violations of M/s Dadi Impex Pvt. Ltd. and treating the action taken against M/s Dadi Impex Pvt. Ltd as the offence report, proceedings were initiated against the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 07.07.2015 only on 31.05.2022. The appellant had throughout contested before the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court that it should not be required to deposit the amount because the un-amended provisions of Section 35 of the Customs Act would be applicable. Even after the dismissal of the Civil Appeal by the Supreme Court on 23.01.2017, the appellant took more than five years to file the application for recall of the order. No satisfactory explanation has been given by the applicant for this enormous delay. In fact, only a casual statement has been made that earlier the financial capacity of the appellant was bad and it took sometime to recover, where after the amount was deposited in September 2020. The application was filed after tw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
