https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102111 Where speaking orders are passed earlier but despatched to the importers much later, limitation for appeal cannot be computed merely from finalisation of the bills of entry if the orders were not timely communicated. On the facts noted, the appellate authority treated the appeals as filed within time because the speaking orders dated 1996 were despatched only in 1998, as reflected by the despatch numbers on the original orders. The Commissioner (Appeals) was therefore not justified in rejecting the appeals as time-barred. The rejection was set aside and the matter was remanded for de novo consideration on merits after giving the importers a reasonable opportunity of hearing. en-us Wed, 01 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:04:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102111 Where speaking orders are passed earlier but despatched to the importers much later, limitation for appeal cannot be computed merely from finalisation of the bills of entry if the orders were not timely communicated. On the facts noted, the appellate authority treated the appeals as filed within time because the speaking orders dated 1996 were despatched only in 1998, as reflected by the despatch numbers on the original orders. The Commissioner (Appeals) was therefore not justified in rejecting the appeals as time-barred. The rejection was set aside and the matter was remanded for de novo consideration on merits after giving the importers a reasonable opportunity of hearing. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 01 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102111