Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an appeal filed with delay, without a written application seeking condonation and without showing sufficient cause, could be entertained.
Analysis: The delay in filing the appeal was about 74 days, and no application for condonation accompanied the appeal. The proviso to Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962 permits extension of the prescribed period only if the Commissioner (Appeals) is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal in time. The order holds that a party invoking this discretionary jurisdiction must set out the reasons for delay in a proper written form so that they may be verified. On that basis, the reliance placed on principles of natural justice and on decisions relating to finalisation of provisional assessment was held inapplicable to a case where the threshold requirement of a condonation request itself was not met.
Conclusion: The appeal was not entertainable and the challenge to the delayed filing failed.
Final Conclusion: The Tribunal refused to examine the merits because the appeal was barred by delay and no proper application for condonation had been filed, resulting in dismissal of the appeal and stay petitions.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute confers discretion to condone delay on proof of sufficient cause, the delay cannot be excused unless a proper written request is made and the requisite cause is shown.