Commissioner of Customs Vs. Sumer Enterprises

Commissioner of Customs vs Sumer Enterprises

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Dec 04, 2002

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/29522

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/29522
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: J Balasundaram, J T J.H.
Decided On: Dec 04, 2002
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Customs

Respondent

Sumer Enterprises

Legal References

Reported In: (2003)(160)ELT425Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. the revenue seeks condonation of delay of one month in filing the above appeal against the order of the commissioner of customs (appeals) setting aside the confiscation of goods imported by the respondent with option to redeem the goods on payment of fine and also set aside the penalty.2. the delay is explained as due to transfer of the concerned appraising officer out of the air cargo complex and due to the fact that successor of the transferred officer could not locate the file in time.3. on hearing both sides and satisfying ourselves after perusing the case records produced before us, which shows that action is being initiated for lapse of concerned officer, and after perusing the affidavit of the commissioner of customs, we are satisfied with the reasons for the delay. accordingly, we condone the delay.

Full Judgment

1. The Revenue seeks condonation of delay of one month in filing the above appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) setting aside the confiscation of goods imported by the respondent with option to redeem the goods on payment of fine and also set aside the penalty.

2. The delay is explained as due to transfer of the concerned appraising officer out of the Air Cargo Complex and due to the fact that successor of the transferred officer could not locate the file in time.

3. On hearing both sides and satisfying ourselves after perusing the case records produced before us, which shows that action is being initiated for lapse of concerned officer, and after perusing the affidavit of the Commissioner of Customs, we are satisfied with the reasons for the delay. Accordingly, we condone the delay.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Customs vs Sumer Enterprises Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge J Balasundaram, J T J.H.