TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
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 
