2020 (2) TMI 394

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....RDER JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA : The present Anti Dumping appeal was filed before the Tribunal on 07 October, 2019 to assail the Notification dated 09 April, 2019 issued by the Central Government based on the Final Findings dated 29 March, 2019 of the Designated Authority. Section 9C(i) of the of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 the Act provides that an appeal can be filed before the Tribunal within 90 days of the passing of the order under appeal. It further provides that the Tribunal may entertain any appeal after the expiry of the said period of 90 days if it is satisfied that the Appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal in time. 2. As the appeal was filed beyond a period of 90 days from 09 April, 2019, it was acc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....te of order was about 59 days out of the total delay of 90 days. (c) After the publication of the above order in WP-13685 of 2019 dated 5.9.2019, the Appellant convened management meetings to pursue appellate remedies available to the appellant and the process involved seeking legal opinions, evaluation of legal opinions, engagement of lawyers, providing inputs for the drafting of appeal, vetting of appeal, issuance of authorizations to proper parties as appellant is not based in Delhi etc. which took about another 31 days in total to tile the present appeal. 7. That the Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly treat the above delay as caused on account of bona fide reasons and condone the said delay in the larger interest of justice. Any such condo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ould have invoked the remedy, which remedy has, in fact, been availed by Synergies Castings Limited, a co-petitioner before the Designated Authority, in time. It is, therefore, his submission that the delay condonation application should be rejected. 5. Ms. Aditi Warrier, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 3,8,9,10 & 12 and Ms. Purbita Mitra, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 4 have also submitted that the delay condonation application should be rejected. 6. We have considered the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the Appellant as also the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents. 7. The Notification was issued by the Central Government on 09 April, 2019. The appeal should have, therefore, been fi....