Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2014 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (6) TMI 412 - CESTAT NEW DELHI (LB)Condonation of delay - Inordinate delay of 1234 days - Non receipt of order - Difference of opinion - majority order - Denial of drawback claim - whether the COD application is to be rejected by refusing to condone the delay of 1236 days or should be allowed - Held that:- both the appellant in this appeal and M/s Braun Textile Processors, had filed revision applications before the Joint Secretary (revision application) and their revision applications were rejected as being filed beyond jurisdiction by a common order dated 07/04/10. The order-in-revision does not indicate that this order had been passed after hearing the appellant and the copy of the same had been despatched to them. In view of this, the appellant’s contention that they became aware of the order dated 07/04/10 of the JS (RA) only when the recovery proceedings were initiated has to be accepted. When the COD application of M/s Braun Textile Processors was dismissed by the Tribunal alongwith their appeal, they filed appeal before Hon’ble Delhi High Court and Hon’ble Delhi High Court vide judgment [2014 (6) TMI 51 - DELHI HIGH COURT] has ordered that having regard to peculiar circumstances, the petitioner’s appeal before the CESTAT being [2013 (5) TMI 712 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] shall be taken up for consideration un-influenced by the question of delay and pending applications, if any, with respect to waiver of pre-deposit shall be first decided by the Tribunal before adjudication upon the merits of the case. Hon’ble High Court by this order directed M/s Braun Textile Processors to appear before the Registrar, CESTAT on 25/2/14 for appropriate order to list the appeal and stay application for hearing. Thus, in case of M/s Braun Textile Processors, the Hon’ble High Court has set aside the Tribunal’s order refusing the condone delay and has directed the Tribunal to hear the stay application and appeal on merits without being influenced by the question of delay. In view of this, in the present appeal also, where the facts and circumstances are identical, the same view has to be taken and the delay of 1236 days has to be condoned - Delay condoned.
|