2006 (1) TMI 398

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l is directed against the order-in-appeal dated 5-11-2004 wherein the appellants' appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the question of limitation. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are : The appellants imported stock lot of Ceramic wall tiles and filed the Bill of Entry for the assessment by declaring the value bf US $ 1.05 per sq. mtr. along with invoices a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppealable order. Thereafter, the appellants preferred an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) against the said Bill of Entry. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order dated 5-11-2004, did not go into the merits and dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation itself. 3. The learned advocate appearing for the appellants I submits that, the Revenue authorities should have responde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lants for filing the appeal. 5. Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. I find that the appellants' appeal was dismissed on the ground of limitation. The provisions of Section 128 of the Customs Act do not permit the appellate authority to condone any period beyond 30 days after the mandatory period of 60 days of appeal. In short, the Commissioner (Appeals) cou....