9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 1629X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant- M/s Threepence Craft challenging the Defect Miscellaneous Order No. 50132/ 2025 dated 10th February, 2025 (hereinafter, 'the impugned order') passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter, 'the CESTAT'). 4. Vide the impugned order, the CESTAT has dismissed the application filed by the Appellant i.e., Customs Condonation of Delay Application No. 51908 of 2024 on the ground of delay. 5. The brief background of this case is that an investigation was conducted against the Appellant Company and its Partners on the allegation that certain goods were exported by them which were highly over-valued, only with the intention to earn duty drawbacks. 6. Pursuant to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -Appeal No. CC(A)/CUS/D-II/ICD/PPG/233-247/19-20 dated 28th May, 2019, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeal) was challenged by the Appellant before the CESTAT. The said appeal was filed after the COVID-19 pandemic, only on 29th January, 2024. Thus, there was a substantial delay in the filing of the appeal of more than 1607 days. The said timeline is captured in brief hereinbelow: Date of Order in Appeal 28.05.2019 Date on which the Appellant received the Order in Appeal 03.06.2019 Date on which limitation period of three months for filing appeal under Section 129 of Customs Act, 1962 expired 02.09.2019 Appeal filed on 29.01.2024 Total Days of Delay 1607 days 11. On 10th February, 2025, CESTAT dismissed the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... minated into the arrest of the Appellant on 25th September, 2021; ii. The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic between 2020 to 2022 which has also been dealt with by the Supreme Court in Re: Cognizance for extension of Limitation having Misc. Application No. 21 of 2022 in M.A. No. 665 of 2021 in Suo Moto Writ Appeal (C) No. 3 of 2020. iii. The medical condition of the Appellant Company's Partner in respect of which some records have been placed along with the present appeal. 17. In view of these facts, this Court is of the opinion that there is sufficient cause shown by the Appellant to justify the delay in filing the appeal. 18. However, the said delay is being condoned, subject to stringent terms and conditions: i. The Appellant s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
