Case Law Details
Raj Kumar Swarnkar Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Allahabad)
Introduction: The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) Allahabad has set a significant precedent in the case of Raj Kumar Swarnkar vs Commissioner of Customs. The appeal addresses the failure of the department to dispatch the order to the assessee, challenging the bar of limitation under Section 128 of the Customs Act. The tribunal has remanded the matter for adjudication after considering the circumstances surrounding the communication of the decision.
Detailed Analysis: Raj Kumar Swarnkar, the appellant, faced an appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 148 – CUS/APPL/LKO/2023 dated 02/02/2023, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Lucknow. The case revolves around the absolute confiscation of seized gold and the imposition of a penalty of Rs.4 lakhs by the Order-in-Original dated 06.07.2018.
The appeal was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the grounds of being barred by limitation, without delving into the merits. The appellant contends that he was unaware of the Order-in-Original, which was apparently dispatched to his old address. Due to the closure of his business and the subsequent shift, the appellant received information about the order only on 05.05.2022, prompting him to file an appeal.
The appellant argues that the order was not served in a manner known to law, and the pandemic further delayed his awareness of the proceedings. The Commissioner (Appeals), without acknowledging the issue of non-service, dismissed the appeal based on the bar of limitation.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
