M/S Pan Drugs Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs, Ahmedabad

Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal7 July 2015

CitationAppeal No.C/10219/2015; C/S/10167/2015, C/COD/10168/2015

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The application for condonation of delay is rejected because the reason offered, that the Manager (EXIM) was under medical treatment for a long period, is not supported by any documents filed with the application; a bare assertion of illness without supporting evidence is insufficient to condone a delay of 78 days in filing the appeal.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

In The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate TribunalWest Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad

Appeal No.C/10219/2015; C/S/10167/2015, C/COD/10168/2015 [Arising out of OIA No.AHM-CUSTM-000-APP-239-14-15, dt.20.06.2014, passed by Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Ahmedabad]

M/s Pan Drugs Ltd. Appellant

Commissioner of Customs, Ahmedabad Respondent

Represented by:

For Appellant: None For Respondent: Shri L. Tendupatra, Authorised Representative

For approval and signature:

Honble Mr. P.K. Das, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. P.M. Saleem, Member (Technical)

1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the No Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of Seen the order?

4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Departmental Yes authorities?

CORAM:

HONBLE MR. P.K. DAS, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) HONBLE MR. P.M. SALEEM, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

Date of Hearing/Decision:07.07.2015

Order No. A/10964 / 2015, dt.07.07.2015

Per: P.K. Das

The Applicant filed this application for condonation of delay of filing appeal of 78 days. None appears on behalf of the Applicant. There is no application for adjournment. On perusal of the records, we find that the matter was adjourned on earlier occasion at the request of the Appellant. Hence, we proceed to take up the COD application.

2. After hearing the learned Authorised Representative appearing on behalf of the Revenue and on perusal of the application for condonation of delay, we find that the reason for delay of filing appeal is that Shri Sunil Kumar K., Manager EXIM was under medical treatment for quite long time. We find that no supporting documents were filed alongwith the application. Hence, the application for condonation of delay of filing appeal is rejected. Consequently, the appeal alongwith stay application are also dismissed.

(Dictated & Pronounced in Court)

(P.M. Saleem) (P.K. Das) Member (Technical) Member (Judicial)

Cbb 2

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free