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>Tribunal denies condonation of delay in rectification application, citing statutory limitations.</h1> <h3>MCT DELUXE HONOUR INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT), NEW DELHI</h3> MCT DELUXE HONOUR INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT), NEW DELHI - 2020 (371) E.L.T. 727 (Tri. - Del.) Issues: Application for condonation of delay in filing application for rectification of mistake in Final Order.The judgment deals with an application for condonation of delay in filing an application for rectification of mistake in Final Order No. 50267/2019. The appellant received the Final Order on 1st March, 2019, and sought condonation of delay as the counsel was traveling abroad and the appeal could not be filed within the stipulated six-month period. The appellant relied on the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Jammu & Kashmir v. Steel Strips Ltd. The Departmental Representative opposed the application, stating that the statute does not provide for such condonation and the reason for delay was not sufficient, being at the end of the limitation period.Upon hearing both parties, the Tribunal observed that the time to file the application for rectification of mistake expired on 1st September, 2019, as per Section 129B(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal noted that the provision allows for a six-month period from the date of the order for rectification, either suo motu or on request of a party. The Tribunal emphasized that it has no inherent power to extend the period beyond what is specified in the statute.Analyzing the merits of the application, the Tribunal found that the appellant approached the counsel only on 22nd August, 2019, when informed about the counsel's travel plans. The Tribunal concluded that the reason for seeking condonation of delay only applied to the last three days of the six-month period, which had already expired by 1st September, 2019. The Tribunal dismissed the application, stating that the absence of the counsel beyond 30th June, 2019, was not a sufficient cause for the appellant to delay pursuing the application diligently. The Tribunal also clarified that the case law cited by the appellant was not applicable to the current situation, as the cause shown was deemed insufficient. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay was dismissed.
TaxTMI 