2018 (12) TMI 266

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 6.2.2018 passed by the Commissioner (A) whereby the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeal of the appellant on the ground of non-maintainability under the provisions of Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant was sanctioned duty drawback of Rs. 2,57,322/- under Section 75 of the C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g the submissions of the appellant, the learned Commissioner (A) rejected the appeal on non-maintainability without going into the merits of the case. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the facts and the law. He further sub....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e apex court but the said decision is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case as the order was passed ex-parte as the appellant have not received the show-cause notice and not appeared before the original authority. The reasons given by the appellant appears to be bona fide as the part of the unit of the appellant was taken over by the Metro Rails and there were disruptions in th....