TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (4) TMI 1024
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndent : Mr. A. P. Srinivas for R1 R2-Tribunal JUDGMENT (The Judgment of the Court was made by T. S. Sivagnanam, J.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the Final Order No.678/11 dated 23.06.2011 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench at Chennai. 2. The appeal is yet to be numbered as there is delay of 823 days i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee against the order of assessment of Bill of Entry dated 17.10.2007, 18.01.2008, 25.04.2008, 29.07.2008 and 30.08.2008 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Group II), Customs House, Chennai. The assessee claimed that there was a typographical error and wrong details of RSP pertaining to one item in the bill of entry was furnished resulting in excess payment and by placing reliance on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e should have been careful while presenting the bill of entry and the check list should have been throughly verified for correct details and if not they could have been more observant when they paid duty, which they now claim was due to typographical error. 5. On further appeal before the Tribunal (CESTAT), after considering the case as projected by the assessee, the Tribunal rejected the same on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee has has not stated as to what date the order was served on the assessee. The only reason assigned in the affidavit filed in support of the condone delay petition is that their Accounts Executive-Imports left the company during January 2013. However, the order of the Tribunal, having been passed in June 2011, there is no explanation as to what the assessee was doing till January 2013, when ....