Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (4) TMI 718 - CESTAT CHENNAI

2016 (4) TMI 718 - CESTAT CHENNAI - TMI - Condonation of delay - Delay of 244 days - Appellant pleaded that they have not received the original OIA passed on 14.10.14 till date - Held that:- the address of the appellant is correctly written and there is no change in the address but the letter has been returned as "unclaimed". On receipt of the recovery notice, the appellant has immediately taken steps with the Commissioner (Appeals) asking for a certified copy. The Superintendent of (Appeals-II) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he appellants have not authorized Shri. Chandrasekaran. On perusal of the whole correspondence of appellants with Commissioner (Appeals), the certified copy was not issued by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellants requested for the same.

Thus, it is found that appellants obtained a copy of the impugned order through Recovery Cell by email copy dt.13.8.15. Also Section 153 of the Customs Act existed during the period in dispute. On perusal of the Customs Act,it is found that there .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

0 days. 2. The Learned counsel submits that order in appeal was passed on 14.10.14 and they have not received the order till date. They came to know from Arrears Recovery Cell of Customs of Tuticorin letter dt.25.6.2015 where the Department sought for recovery of confirmed dues. Subsequently, they came to know that Order in appeal was passed and they took up the matter with Commissioner (Appeals) on 22.7.15 and the Commissioner (Appeals) on 27.7.15 informed them that the order appeal was despatc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

submits that it appears that Advocate Velmurugan is unauthorized and appellant authorized S.Chandrasekaran to appear before the Commissioner. He submits that they have not received any copy of the order from S.Chandrasekaran, Advocate and he is not authorized by the Appellant. Since the Commissioner (Appeals) refused to issue any certified copy and directed us to obtain a copy from S.Chandrasekaran, Advocate, since he has not authorized a copy of the order from Arrears Recovery Cell by email dt. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

stification for condonation of delay. 4. Ld. Advocate also submits that U/s.153, there is no provision to serve copy of the order to authorized persons unlike Central Excise Act under Section 37C. 5. After hearing both sides, we find that there is a delay of 244 days. The reasons explained by the Advocate and the main plea is that they have not received the original OIA till date. On perusal of the postal acknowledgement, we find that the address of the Appellant is correctly written and there i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version