2016 (10) TMI 23
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.T.Pramodkumar Chopada, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner seeks to challenge the order passed by the first respondent and to direct the first respondent to condone the delay in filing the appeal and dispose of the same on merits. 3. Admittedly, the Appeal has been filed after a delay of 382 days, which i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w the procedure under section 153 of the Customs Act and it has been followed. 5. The above facts have been noted in the impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). Further in the counter affidavit, this fact has been elaborately stated. Furthermore, the respondents would add that the copy of the order was also sent to the counsel, because the petitioner was represented by a C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by Registered Post on 14.5.2004 and it was returned 'undelivered' and thereafter displayed in the Notice Board as per the provisions contained under section 153 of the Customs Act and it was also pointed out that the petitioner has shifted its place of business from the original place and such shifting was ever communicated to the respondents for the purpose of communicating the orders.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation as regards such shifting was ever communicated to the respondents for the purpose of communication of the orders. The said fact is not in dispute. 4. In the said circumstances, when the order dated 11.5.2004 was duly forwarded to the address which was originally placed before the respondents by the petitioner, and if the communication of the said order did not reach the petitioner, becaus....