TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o-op. Society Ltd. following the decision aforesaid, we set aside the order dated 24th January 2006 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 26479 of 2005 and allow the writ appeal. - the appellate authority, having no jurisdiction to condone such delay, rightly dismissed the appeal as time-barred – delay can not be condoned beyond 30 days by the Commissioner (appeals) - 335 of 2006 and W.A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statute for the purpose of determination of appeal on merits. 3. It appears that the respondent (writ petitioner), who was carrying on business of exporting cotton shirts, exported goods to the value of Rs. 8,45,082/- under Shipping Bill No. 650 dated 1st May 1988 and claimed drawback for a sum of Rs. 1,43,834/-, which was allowed and paid back on 6th January 1998. Subsequently, the first appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 128(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. In the present case, as the appeal preferred by the respondent (writ petitioner) was with 46 days delay, the appellate authority, having no jurisdiction to condone such delay, rightly dismissed the appeal as time-barred. He also placed reliance on a Division Bench decision of this Court in Indian Coffee Workers' Co-op. Society Ltd. v. Commissioner of Comme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can direct the appellate authority to dispose of the matter on merits. After hearing the parties, the Division Bench held as follows :- "The legal position is as follows: (a) An appeal under Section 30(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 has to be filed within 30 days before the appellate Assistant Commissioner. The appellate Assistant Commissioner is empowered to condone the del ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India, cannot re-write the provisions of the Act." 9. As in the present case, we find that the case of the respondent (writ petitioner) is covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Indian Coffee Workers' Co-op. Society Ltd. case [2002 (1) CTC 406] (supra), following the decision aforesaid, we set aside the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
