1998 (11) TMI 219

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the Respondent. [Order]. -  This is an application for rectification of Final Order Nos. 2757 to 2760/1997, dated 7-10-1997 by which the Tribunal [comprising of Shri V.P. Gulati, Vice President and Shri T.P. Nambiar, Member (J)] rejected the appeal on the ground that appellants ought to have filed the declaration in terms of Rule 57T(1) prior to receipt of the capital goods. It obser....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lso asked for COD. He submits that the Advocate appearing before the Tribunal could not place the proviso and hence it resulted in the order which does not take into consideration the second proviso to Rule 57T(1) which lays down for filing of declaration even after receipt of the goods. Therefore, he submits that as the order is not in terms of the said proviso of the said rule, hence there is an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ther period as may be allowed by the said Assistant Collector for a maximum of another 2 months from the date of receipt of the said capital goods in the factory, the Assistant Collector on sufficient cause being shown may condone the delay in filing the declaration. As the provision of law clearly stipulate for filing of declaration even after the receipt of the goods, therefore, the order of the....