Case Law Details
Suparna Karmakar Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Kolkata)
Introduction: In the case of Suparna Karmakar vs. Commissioner of Customs, the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) Kolkata dismissed an appeal filed by the appellant on the grounds that it was filed beyond the condonable period stipulated by Section 128 of the Customs Act.
Detailed Analysis: The appellant had lodged this appeal against an impugned order in which the learned Commissioner (Appeals) had dismissed the appeal on the basis of being time-barred.
During the hearing, the appellant’s counsel highlighted that they had previously approached the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta, and the High Court had dismissed their Writ Petition. The purpose of this Writ Petition was to seek an alternative remedy available to them. Subsequently, the appellant filed the present appeal before the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT).
The case’s facts are as follows: the adjudication order was issued on July 31, 2019. In response to this order, the appellant submitted an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on November 28, 2019. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal on the grounds of being barred by limitation. This decision was based on the appeal being filed beyond the prescribed period established under Section 128 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962. Dissatisfied with this outcome, the appellant approached the CESTAT.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
