2014 (12) TMI 445

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... th profession of the first respondent, the Department has issued a show cause notice and thereby claimed additional excise duty and the same has been challenged by Order-in-Original dated 25-5-2005, wherein claim of the Department has been confirmed. Against the Order-in-Original, an appeal has been preferred in Appeal No. 119 - 2005-TTN(CUS)(ADK) before the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Tiruchirapalli, wherein claim of the Department has been rejected and in filing an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, a delay of 30 days has occurred and in order to condone the same, Miscellaneous Petition has been filed and the same has been dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal by its Order dated 23-2-2007. Against the said order .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ferred, the delay mentioned in the miscellaneous petition cannot be condoned and therefore, the dismissal order passed by the Appellate Tribunal is liable to be set aside. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent has contended that, as per Section 129A(1B) of the Customs Act, 1962, a Review Committee can be set up for deciding as to whether an appeal has to be preferred or not against the order in question and in the instant case, the erstwhile Review Committee has already decided not to prefer any appeal and subsequently one of the members of the erstwhile Review Committee has been transferred and therefore, new Review Committee cannot be constituted for taking a decision afresh with regard to filing of an appeal. Un .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uting a fresh Review Committee for deciding a matter which has already been decided. Since there is no embargo nor inhibition in the relevant section with regard to constitution of new Review Committee for taking a decision afresh in respect of the subject already decided, this Court is of the view that the reason given by the Appellate Tribunal for dismissing the petition which has been filed for condoning the delay cannot be accepted and further, we are concerned with only to condone the delay of 30 days. 10. Considering the fact there is no inhibition in the concerned section for constituting a fresh Review Committee for taking decision afresh which has already been decided and since the petition in question is only for condoning t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X