2017 (1) TMI 1222

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al No. C/10192/2016-DB; Application No. C/COD/1008/2016, dismissing the application preferred by the present appellant seeking condonation of delay of 332 days and consequently, dismissing the Appeal, the appellant has preferred this Tax Appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1944 praying for quashing and setting aside the impugned orders and to direct the Tribunal to hear the said Appeal of the appellant on merits, in the interest of justice. 2. Heard Shri Devan Parikh, learned senior advocate appearing with learned advocate Mr. Raj K Vyas, learned advocate on behalf of the appellant and Shri Dhaval D. Vyas, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Revenue. 3. Shri Devan Parikh, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted and filed till the reminder for recovery of dues was received from the Department. It is further urged that the appellant was fully aware of the fact that the reply to the show cause notice and the appeal before the learned Commissioner [Appeals] against the adjudication order had been filed through them only and the same cannot be independently filed by M/s. Ganpati Energy Private Limited. That the appellant cannot be benefited by its own negligence, therefore, it was requested by Shri Dhaval Vyas, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent to dismiss the present Appeal. 5. Having considered the facts of the case, submissions made for and on behalf of the respective parties, it appears that the learned Tribunal in an app....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iginal dated 27th May 2014 confirming the demand of difference in customs duty alongwith interest and penalty. That, thereafter the appellant filed an Appeal before the Commissioner of Customs [Appeals], Ahmedabad which came to be dismissed by an order dated 2nd December 2012. Thereafter, the appellant preferred appeal before the respondent praying to condone the delay of 332 days occurred in filing the aforesaid Appeal. It is stated by the appellant that since the goods were purchased as per the agreed price, there was no liability on the part of the appellant to pay additional amount and and he had forwarded the said show cause notice to M/s. Ganpati Energy Private Limited for doing the needful. It is further stated that all this work was....