9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1017X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the appellant. Rep. by Shri Govind Dixit, DR for the respondent. ORDER The misc. application is for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The impugned order was passed by the Commissioner of Customs, (Preventive), IGI Airport, New Delhi, on 26.06.2015. The appeal against the said order was filed by the appellant on 15.12.2016 resulting in delay of more than 470 days. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the non-existence of the appellant in the given business address, neither the counsel for the applicant nor the proprietor could provide any satisfactory explanation. 3. Ld. AR stated that during the course of inquiry by the officers at the time of import, Shri Hari Singh Vishta, Proprietor of the importing firm categorically stated that M/s. Saral Communication was working at Shop No.13-B, Poc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provided a false address and now cannot plead that the Department failed to serve the impugned order to him. Even the letter requesting for copies of the impugned order and other documents had mentioned the same address of the appellant. The revenue recovery action by the department was initiated based upon inquiry about the whereabouts of the appellant which is after the issue of impugned order. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... licant with any conviction. The plea taken by the applicant that the order could have been served in his residential address is not acceptable. The impugned order is to be sent to the address declared by the applicant in the filings made before the Department. The Department found that various other addresses including residential, during the course of revenue recovery action. That did not mean th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st was returned with the remark "no such firm". The said order was displayed in the notice board. Hence, we are not persuaded to accept that the order was not served in terms of Section 153 of Customs Act, 1962. Regarding condonation of delay, in view of non-bonafide action of the appellant as narrated above, we are not inclined to accept the miscellaneous application. No reasonable cause for such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
