TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal Dismissed for Delay in Filing: Importance of Timely Submissions & Valid Reasons</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI Versus NEPTUNE CARGO MOVERS</h3> The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as time-barred due to the appellant's failure to provide a satisfactory reason for the 64-day delay in filing the ... Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Limitation Department's application for condonation of 64 days' delay in filing appeal rejected. Appellant explained delay by stating that 'a proper care is made in the preparation of the grounds of appeal' and that the delay was 'due to circumstances beyond the department's control.' Applicant relied on Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. MST. Katiji (liberal approach). Opponent invoked Union of India v. Tata Yodogawa Ltd., where a three-Judge Bench refused condonation of 51 days' delay, noting absence of 'cogent explanation' for intervening periods and rejecting explanations based on interdepartmental correspondence. Tribunal held the present explanation inadequate, observing it amounted to suggesting 'there are departmental appeals which could be prepared without care.' Preferring the three-Judge Tata Yodogawa precedent over the two-Judge Katiji view, the Bench found no valid or cogent reason for the delay. Result: appeal dismissed as time-barred and condonation application dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
