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>Supreme Court grants appeal, sets aside Tribunal's order, and directs fresh hearing</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Versus CANDID ENTERPRISES</h3> The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Tribunal's order, granted condonation of delay, and instructed the Tribunal to hear the appeal on its ... Appeal - Limitation Issues Involved: Appeal against the order of Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal for delay in filing appeal and validity of duty free clearance for 'acrylamide' as a synthetic adhesive.Issue 1: Delay in Filing AppealThe Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal declined to condone the delay in filing the appeal by the Revenue, citing the judgment in Ajit Singh Thakur's case [(1981) 1 SCC 495] and stating it could not consider the grounds of appeal. However, the Supreme Court emphasized the principle that fraud nullifies everything as per Section 17 of the Limitation Act, and highlighted the need to investigate potential fraud in the case. The Court held that the Tribunal erred in not condoning the delay and directed the Tribunal to hear the appeal on its merits without being influenced by its earlier order.Issue 2: Duty Free Clearance for 'Acrylamide'The respondent claimed duty free clearance for 'acrylamide' as a synthetic adhesive against value-based advanced licenses for exporting leather goods. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs initially rejected the claim, but the Commissioner (Appeals) later accepted it based on expert opinions and certificates from various sources including V.M. Divate, Mitsubishi Chemicals, Professor D.D. Kale, and the Deputy Chief Chemist. Subsequently, doubts arose regarding the authenticity of some documents relied upon by the respondent, leading to an investigation by the Central Intelligence Unit of the Mumbai Custom House. Despite these doubts, the Supreme Court did not delve into the specifics of the duty free clearance issue in this judgment.Separate Judgement:The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Tribunal's order, granted condonation of delay, and instructed the Tribunal to hear the appeal on its merits without considering the previous order. No costs were awarded in this matter.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
