9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant: Ms. Amritha Aravind, Adv. For the Respondent: Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, ADC (AR) ORDER Per Bench: The department has filed the application for condonation of delay of 37 days in filing the application seeking rectification of mistake in the final order dated 24.04.2018. 2. On behalf of the department, the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, ADC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtment has also filed an application for ROA. This application is filed as abundant caution in case the ROM is not allowed by the Tribunal. 4. The learned counsel Ms. Amutha Aravind appeared on behalf of the respondent. She submitted that the delay of 37 days in filing the ROM application cannot be condoned. There is no provision in the Customs Act, 1962 or in the CESTAT Procedure Rules for condo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entative of the department is not an error apparent on the face of record. That the Tribunal had considered the submissions made and after perusal of records had allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. She produced copy of the documents furnished by appellants before the Refund Sanctioning Authority and pointed out that it bears that the department has received all documents. The Chartered Accou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delay in filing the ROM application. The decisions discuss that the provision of Limitation Act is not applicable to the Tribunal. Following the said decision, we are of the considered opinion that the delay in filing the ROM application cannot be condoned. Hence, COD application is dismissed. 9. Even though, the application for condonation of delay for filing the ROM is dismissed, we will also d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
