9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g duty, ordinarily, it is a remedy provided under the statute that must be availed of. The High Court should not normally permit the Petitioner to bypass mechanisms provided under the statute. The Hon ble Supreme Court also held that delay cannot be condoned beyond the maximum condonable period provided under the statute. The Court held that where complete mechanism is provided under the act for challenging assessment orders, that mechanism alone must be followed. A Writ Petition is not maintainable so as to defeat the statutory scheme. Delays beyond the aggregate period prescribed, as the maximum condonable period, cannot be condoned by exercising powers under Article 142 or 226 of the Constitution. Nor can such delay be condoned by invoki ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent No.2 to decide the issue on its own merits. (b) That this Hon ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the record and proceedings in Order-In-Appeal No. MUM-CUS-JSN-EXP-131,132 133/2019-20 NCH dated 20.02.2020 to allow the benefit of drawback claim in respect of limitation period; 3. The petitioner, in effect, challenges the Commissioner s order dated 20 February 2020 by which the Commissioner dismissed the petitioner s appeals against impugned orders in original dated 27 February 2004, 31 August 2004 and 07 August 2008 on the ground that such appeals were time-barred and instituted even beyond the condonable period in Section 128 of the Customs Act. 4. The peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in writing: Provided that no such adjournment shall be granted more than three times to a party during hearing of the appeal. (2) Every appeal under this section shall be in such form and shall be verified in such manner as may be specified by rules made in this behalf. 7. The Commissioner (Appeals) could have entertained the appeal within 60 days or, if sufficient cause was made out, within a further 30 days. However, this appeal was instituted after a delay of almost 130 days, which the Commissioner (Appeals) could not even condone, given the provisions of Section 128 of the Customs Act. Accordingly, there is no legal infirmity for the impugned order dated 20 February 2020. No case is made out to interfere with the impugned order. 8. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court cannot do by exercising powers under Article 142, the High Courts also cannot do by exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Court has emphatically held that neither Article 142 nor Article 226 jurisdiction can be exercised when invoked to undermine or defeat the applicable statutory regime. This is precisely what the present Petitioner seeks to achieve. 12. The Hon ble Supreme Court also held that delay cannot be condoned beyond the maximum condonable period provided under the statute. The Court held that where complete mechanism is provided under the act for challenging assessment orders, that mechanism alone must be followed. A Writ Petition is not maintainable so as to defeat the statutory scheme. Delays beyond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
