Appeal dismissed as time-bar, but Tribunal grants extension based on duty payment process.

The appeal was dismissed as time-bar by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to being filed beyond the 60-day period from the date of assessment on the Bill of Entry. The appellants argued that the appeal was within the 60-day limit from the duty payment date. The Tribunal held that the appeal was within the extended 90-day period considering the date of assessment, as the delay was justified by the duty payment process. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was remanded for a decision on the merits after granting the appellants a hearing opportunity.

---

---

Issues: Appeal dismissed as time-bar by the Commissioner (Appeals) based on the filing timeline.

In this case, the appellants filed an appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) which was dismissed as time-bar due to being filed beyond the 60-day period from the date of assessment on the Bill of Entry. The appellants contended that the assessment was done on a specific date, duty was paid later, and the appeal was filed within the 60-day limit. On the other hand, the Revenue argued that the 60-day period should be counted from the date of assessment since the Bill of Entry is returned after assessment for duty deposit.

The Customs Act, 1962, specifically Section 128(1), allows for appeals within 60 days from the date of communication of the decision or order, with provision for the Commissioner (Appeals) to condone a further delay of 30 days if sufficient cause is shown for missing the initial deadline. The Revenue acknowledged that duty was paid on a certain date, and the appeal was filed within the limitation period. Even if the date of assessment of the Bill of Entry is considered, the appeal was still within the extended 90-day period. The Tribunal found that since the appellants were in the process of paying duty and releasing goods from Customs authority, the delay in filing the appeal was justifiable. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on the merits after providing the appellants with a hearing opportunity.

---