Bombay High Court overturns Customs Tribunal order, citing significant delay. Emphasizes fair process for parties.

The High Court of Bombay allowed the Appeals under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, challenging a common order by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal due to significant delay in passing the order. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were restored to the Tribunal for fresh consideration, following the decision in similar cases. The Court emphasized addressing the delay issue and providing a fair opportunity for the parties to present their case in the fresh disposal of the appeals.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal challenging Tribunal's order passed after delay - Identical question of law regarding delay in passing order - Common order challenged by multiple parties - Restoration of appeal for fresh consideration.

Analysis:
The judgment by the High Court of Bombay pertains to two Appeals under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, challenging a common order dated 26th June, 2016 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The learned Counsel for the Appellant raised an identical question of law in both Appeals, questioning the delay in passing the impugned order by the Tribunal. The issue was whether the Tribunal was correct in passing the order after a significant delay from the date of hearing, contrary to previous judgments of the Court. The Appeals were admitted on substantial questions of law, and at the parties' request, taken up for final disposal promptly.

The impugned order of the Tribunal dated 27th June, 2016, was a common order involving not only the two Appellants but also other parties. Subsequently, other parties challenged the order, leading to their appeals being allowed on September 26, 2016. The order dated 27th June, 2016 was set aside, and the appeal was restored to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. The Court noted that the reasons stated in the order of September 26, 2016, in the appeals of other parties would equally apply to the present Appeals. Consequently, following the decision in the previous case, the Court allowed the Appeals, setting aside the impugned order, and restored both Appellants' appeals to the Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with the law.

In conclusion, the judgment left all contentions open to be raised before the Tribunal, ensuring that the parties have the opportunity to present their arguments and evidence in the fresh disposal of the appeals. The Court's decision focused on addressing the delay issue in passing the order and ensuring a fair and lawful process for the parties involved.

---