TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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 dismisses appeal for delay in filing under Customs Act, 1962. Commissioner lacks jurisdiction for condonation.</h1> The appeal regarding the condonation of a 31-day delay in filing under section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962 was dismissed by the Tribunal. Citing ... Condonation of delay of thirty one days in filing the appeal - power of Commissioner (Appeals) as per section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962 to condone - HELD THAT:- The Commissioner (Appeals) as per section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962 could have condoned the delay of thirty days. Hon’ble Supreme Court held in case of SINGH ENTERPRISES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAMSHEDPUR [2007 (12) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT] categorically held The Commissioner and the High Court were therefore justified in holding that there was no power to condone the delay after the expiry of 30 days period. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court this Commissioner (Appeals) could not have condoned the delay as prayed for by the appellant. The impugned order cannot be faulted with and is upheld - Appeal dismissed. Issues Involved:1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal u/s 128 of the Customs Act, 1962.Summary:The primary issue in the present appeal is the condonation of a 31-day delay in filing the appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal on the grounds that it was filed after the permissible period of 90 days as stipulated u/s 128(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant received the impugned order on 03.01.2019 and filed the appeal on 04.04.2019, exceeding the statutory limit by 31 days.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Singh Enterprises [2008 (221) E.L.T. 163 (S.C.)] held that the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) and the Tribunal, being creatures of statute, have no jurisdiction to condone delays beyond the statutorily provided period. The appeal must be filed within 60 days, and a further 30 days can be condoned if sufficient cause is shown. This ruling excludes the application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning delays beyond the permissible period.Further, the Delhi Bench in Shambhu Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi [2021 (378) E.L.T. 208 (Tri.-Del.)] reiterated that the Commissioner (Appeals) could only condone a delay of up to 30 days beyond the initial 60 days, emphasizing the statutory limit.Additionally, the Delhi High Court in Uttam Sucrotech International (P) Ltd. v. Union of India [2011 (264) E.L.T. 502 (Del.)] confirmed that the appellate authority has no power to condone delays beyond the 30-day extension after the initial 60 days.Given these precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the Commissioner (Appeals) acted within the legal framework by dismissing the appeal as time-barred. The appeal was dismissed, and the impugned order was upheld.(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
