Time-Barred Appeal u/s 128 of Customs Act: CESTAT Dismisses Appeal Due to Delay Beyond Deadline [Read Order]

featured-image

The Mumbai Bench of Customs,Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal(CESTAT) dismissed the appeal as time-barred under Section 128 of the Customs Act,1962 due to delay beyond the deadline. S.R. Electrosteel Pvt. Ltd.,appellant-assessee had its appeal listed on 14.05.2024 and 17.09.2024, but no one appeared on its behalf on either date. The assessee had sent a [...]

Sign In Sign Up Top Stories The Mumbai Bench of Customs,Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal(CESTAT) dismissed the appeal as time-barred under Section 128 of the Customs Act,1962 due to delay beyond the deadline. S.R.

Electrosteel Pvt. Ltd.,appellant-assessee had its appeal listed on 14.



05.2024 and 17.09.

2024, but no one appeared on its behalf on either date. The assessee had sent a letter dated 08.05.

2024 to the Deputy Registrar, requesting the appeal be decided on merits. As there was no request for adjournment, the tribunal heard and decided the appeal based on available records and with assistance from the department’s representative. The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) , rejected the appeal through order dated 12.

02.2014 on the ground of limitation. It was held that the adjudication order was deemed communicated on 17.

06.2013, when the goods were cleared. As the appeal was filed on 01.

11.2013, it was treated as time-barred under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. Worried About SME IPO Pitfalls? Gain Clarity with This Advanced Course! Register Now The two member bench comprising S.

K.Mohanty(Judicial Member) and M.M Parthiban(Technical Member) observed that under Section 128(1) of the Customs Act, an appeal must be filed within 60 days from the date the order is communicated, with a further 30 days allowed at the discretion of the Commissioner (Appeals).

In this case, the order was communicated on 17.06.2013, so the final deadline expired on 16.

09.2013. Since the appeal was filed on 01.

11.2013, it was clearly time-barred. Read More: Commissioner Misdirected Findings in Export Services Dispute: CESTAT Remands Getz Pharma CENVAT Credit Refund Matter The appellate tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) had no power to condone the delay and noted that the assessee did not provide any evidence to dispute the date of receipt.

Therefore, it accepted 17.06.2013 as the date of communication.

The CESTAT found no merit in the assessee’s appeal and dismissed it due to being time-barred under Section 128 of the Customs Act. Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium . Follow us on Telegram for quick updates Topics © 2025 Taxscan © 2025 Taxscan.