Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Tamil Nadu
Roop Chand Rajesh Kumar vs Commissioner Of Customs on 19 July, 1999
Equivalent citations: 1999(66)ECC405
ORDER S.L. Peeran, Member (J)
1. These appeal arises from Order-in-Appeal Nos. 53 & 533/92 dated 26.08.92 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Chennai. In E.A. 3 form, the appellant has stated in para 3 that they have received the order on 15.09.92. They should have filed the appeal within 15.12.1992. However, this appeal has been filed on January, 1993. The Registry vide Defect Memo dated 29.01.93 had called upon the appellants to file an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal giving reasons and also called upon them to file another appeal, as the Commissioner has disposed of one more appeal by the impugned order. Till date, the appellants have not taken any steps to explain the delay and to file supplemental appeal. They have also not filed Order-in-Original despite the Registry called upon to do so.
2. The learned Advocate Sri A.P. Datar appears and submits that the party has not given him necessary instructions to file application for COD.
3. The learned DR seeks for dismissal of the appeal as time barred. She submits that the issue is also covered by the judgment of M/s. Heerji & Veerji Co. as per Final Order No. 38/97 dated 13.12.96 of the Tribunal.
4. On a careful consideration of the submissions, we find that as the appeal is barred by time and the appellant has not taken any interest in explaining the delay and further as the supplemental appeal has not filed, the appeal is dismissed. We further notice that the issue also pertains to whether nutmeg is a spice or product of agriculture origin. In the Final Order No. 38/97 referred by the learned DR, the matter has already been decided in detail and the Tribunal has held that for importing nutmegs a specific licence is required as it is not a crude drugs. The Tribunal has upheld the confiscation and levy of penalty. Therefore, the issue being covered by the judgment of the Tribunal, respectively following the same, the appeal is rejected.