Telangana High Court
M/S Spicejet Limited vs The Commissioner Of Customs And Central ... on 8 January, 2024
Author: P.Sam Koshy
Bench: P.Sam Koshy, N.Tukaramji
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
WRIT PETITION No.33305 OF 2023
ORDER:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY) The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking for the following relief:-
"...to writ order or direction, one or more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus, by command declaring the inaction of the office of commissioner of customs and central tax (Appeals -I) in not numbering the petitioners appeal against order in original No.184/2022-ADJN-CUS- ADC dated 13.03.2023 as arbitrary, violative besides unconstitutional against Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the office of Hon'ble Commissioner of Customs and Central Tax (Appeals-I) to appreciate the reasons stated in the application seeking condonation of delay of 115 days in filing the appeal against order - in - original No.184/2022-ADJN-CUS-ADC dated 13.03.2023 and provide an opportunity to the petitioner herein to present the appeal and argue their case on merits and pass..."
2. From the pleadings, it appears that the appeal has been filed with the delay of around 115 days as has been pleaded by the petitioners themselves.
3. Nonetheless the relief sought for in this Writ Petition seems to be most innocuous one. What the petitioners want is that the Office of Commissioner of Customs and Central Tax 2 PSK,J & NTR,J W.P.No.33305 of 2023 (Appeals-I) (for short "the Commissioner (Appeals)") to take cognizance of the appeal filed by them on 11.09.2023 and decide the same in accordance with law.
4. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the Department does not oppose so far as granting of the relief sought for is concerned. However, the only rider that the learned counsel for the Department puts is that the aspect of limitation should be left open for the appellate-authority to decide strictly in accordance with law.
5. We do not find any difficulty in accepting the contention of the learned counsel for the Department.
6. The Writ Petition, therefore stands disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to immediately register the appeal that the petitioners have filed on 11.09.2023. Even if the appeal is barred by time, the appeal should still be registered and decided on its own merits. The appellate authority can reject the appeal either on the ground of the Commissioner (Appeals) not having the power to condone the 3 PSK,J & NTR,J W.P.No.33305 of 2023 delay beyond a particular period or for the appellants having not provided satisfactory ground for not preferring the appeal within the limitation period. If the law permits and if the appellant has shown satisfactory explanation for the delay, the same can also be allowed. The appeals cannot be refused to be accepted by the filing counter only on the ground that it is beyond the permissible limit of delay.
7. With the aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. However, it is made clear that this Bench has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the appeal, so also on the aspect of limitation. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________ P.SAM KOSHY, J ____________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J 08.01.2024.
Fm