2019 (2) TMI 606

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dt. 12/07/2018 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) whereby the Commissioner(Appeals) has rejected the appeal for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962 and Chapter II of Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appella....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nge the Bill of Entry. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals) who rejected the appeal on time bar. 3. Heard both sides and perused records. 4. Learned consultant for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law and the Commissioner(Appeals) has wrongly rejected the appeal on time bar whereas the appellants have filed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mmissioner of Customs (Refund) is also incorrect and without appreciation of the documentary evidence filed by the appellant before him. He further submitted that the appellant filed the appeal in the office of Commissioner of Customs which was acknowledged as IC- 04/12/12/2013 which is evident from the RTI reply dt. 31/05/2016 received from the Assistant Commissioner of CPIO, O/o the Commissioner....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ms requesting to take up the matter for hearing and thereafter again on 31/05/2017, they filed a copy of the appeal memorandum and requested the appellate authority to take up the case and decide the same on merits. He further submitted that the Commissioner(Appeals) has wrongly come to the conclusion that the appeal is time barred. 5. On the other hand, the learned AR defended the impugned ord....