2011 (9) TMI 322

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... peal along with stay application and an application for condonation of delay.   2. The Ld. Advocate for the appellants in their application for condonation of delay has stated that the impugned order was received by the appellant on 05th July 1991, which was challenged by them before the Hon ble High Court of Bombay. The Hon ble High Court vide order dated 17th July 1991 allowed import clear .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t as the appellant was under the bonafide belief contested the matter before the Hon ble High Court of Bombay, therefore, the delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal is condoned. To support this contention, they relied on the decision of Otis Elevator Co (I) Ltd., Vs. CCE, Mumbai, 2007 (220) ELT 304 (Tri-Mum) and Maruti Udyog Ltd., Vs. CC, Kandla , 2009 (244) ELT 66 (Tri-Ahmed).   5. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X