TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 494X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as not been diligent and acted in a mala fide and with deliberate intention presented the appeal belatedly for certain other reasons, then, it would be a case, where, the Court would not exercise discretion in condoning the delay. From the facts of the case, the case on hand does not appear to be one such case as there is no dispute regarding the communications between the appellant and the department, and even in the communication dated 8-9-2008, the Commissioner has observed that if the appellant does not accept the order dated 14-3-2008, it is open to them to move the higher appellate forum - Delay condoned - matter restored before the tribunal - Decided in favour of assessee. - C.M.A. No. 2517 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 19-12-2013 - Chitr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs who envinced interest to purchase and clear the goods, which had already arrived India. However, out of the two, only one had made payment for the consignment and still one more consignment was remaining. 4. It is the case of the appellant that they came to know that one of the purchasers, who had cleared the consignment, had indulged in diversion of the raw silk, which resulted in issuance of show cause notice against the said company under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962, and the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992. The appellant requested grant of permission to take back the goods covered by Bill of Lading No. 10093. The appellant also filed a writ petition to direct the second respondent therein to conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng with an application to condone the delay of 105 days. The Tribunal by order dated 22-4-2009, rejected the application for condonation of delay and consequently, dismissed the appeal on the ground that sufficient cause has not been made out by the appellant. 7. The Tribunal in paragraph No. 5 of its order stated that in the absence of any acceptable explanation for the delay, it declined to condone the delay. The Tribunal, unfortunately, did not advert to the affidavit filed by the appellant, wherein, they have stated about the letters written by them to the Commissioner seeking issuance of corrigendum, and a reply was received only after three reminders were sent, the last of which was sent on 8-8-2008, through their Counsel. 8. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
