Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2019 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 342 - HC - CustomsCondonation of delay - Time limitation of appeal - period of limitation as prescribed under Section 129D of the Customs Act, 1962 - Held that:- The appellant would strenuously contend that there are sufficient records to show that the appeals are not barred by limitation and this Court should pursue the appeal files and examine as to whether the appeals are barred by limitation - such an exercise cannot be done by us in exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 130 of the Customs Act. To be noted, the Commissioner(Appeals), which is a fact finding Authority has rendered a finding that in many of the cases, the review orders have been passed after the stipulated period of 3 months from the date of communication of the order in original since the date of dispatch of the impugned order could not be ascertained with authenticity and the delay in such cases were not considered. The onus is on the appellants that the review orders have been passed within the stipulated time. If the department was unable to discharge such onus, then the consequence has to necessarily follow. The Tribunal also pointed out that the Commissioner (Appeals) has flagged the number of days of noncondonable delay in each of the cases which has not been disputed by the Department. Therefore, the Tribunal held that they are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Before us the Department cannot seek for a roving enquiry or for re-adjudication of facts which has been done by the Tribunal. The order passed by the Tribunal confirming the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) rejecting the appeals on the ground of limitation alone requires to be confirmed - there is no substantial questions of law arising for consideration in these appeals - appeal dismissed.
|