2019 (9) TMI 364

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....akar For Respondent: Mr. A.P. Srinivas ORDER Challenging the Order-in-Original, the learned counsel for the petitioner placed his submission on two folds. Firstly, he would submit that the order is a non-speaking order and secondly that the order is liable to be set aside on the ground of laches, since it was belatedly disposed without adhering to the time limit stipulated in the Circular....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t had not given the reasoning as to why these tariff items will not be applicable to the description of their product has not been specified in the impugned order, it would amount to a non-speaking order. 5. It is no doubt true that the respondent had chosen to rely on Rule 2B of the General Rules by interpretation of the first schedule of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and applied the tariff item fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... than two years from the date when the personal hearing had concluded. Though, the Circulars of the Department may not be mandatory to be complied with, the respondent atleast should have justified the reason for such belated disposal of the case after the personal hearing. On this score also, the order is liable to be set aside. 8. In the light of the above observations, the impugned order dat....