2024 (5) TMI 1668

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri R. Muralidhar, Member (Judicial) And Hon'ble Shri K. Anpazhakan, Member (Technical) For the Applicant : Shri N.K. Chowdhury, Advocate. For the Respondent : Shri P.K. Ghosh, Authorized Representative. ORDER The appellant-applicant has received the Order-in-Original on 11.01.2018. In the proceedings, the appellant was a co-noticee and a penalty of Rs. 10,23,864/- has been impo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the decision of the Department about non-acceptance of their SVLDRS application the present delay has occurred. 2.2. He relied upon the case-law in Lalit Ganatra v. Principal Commr. of Cus., Mumbai, Import-I [2021 (375) E.L.T. 594 (Tri. - Mumbai)] wherein a delay of 4700 days was condoned, directing the appellant to deposit Rs. 5,000/- as cost. He also relied on the Hon'ble Supreme Court's....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... He submits that in the present case, there is nothing to indicate that the main noticee had opted for the scheme and therefore, submits that the filing of the SVLDRS application by the appellant itself was void ab initio; knowing fully well that their application could not be entertained, still the appellant, after fully exhausting their other avenues for filing appeal before the Tribunal by 10.0....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ubmits that the appellant has not brought in any evidence on record to show that the certificate of rejection was actually issued by the Department in November, 2023. 3.2. In view of all these submissions, he submits that the present petition for condonation of delay is liable to be rejected. 4. Heard both sides. 5. We find that the appellant has inordinately delayed their filing of appea....