Dcm Engineering Products Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Dcm Engineering Products vs Commissioner of Customs

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Mar 07, 2003

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/30223

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/30223
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: K Usha, N T C.N.B.
Decided On: Mar 07, 2003
Subject: MRTP

Case Summary

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

MRTP

Key legal issue: MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Dcm Engineering Products

Respondent

Commissioner of Customs

Legal References

Reported In: (2003)(155)ELT612TriDel

Excerpt

1. this is an appeal at the instance of the importer against order passed by the commissioner (appeals) dt. 7-6-02. the order-in-original dt. 19-2-1999 was challenged before the commissioner (appeals). the appeal was dismissed on the ground that it was barred by limitation.the appellant contended that since the order 19-2-99 is the first speaking order received by it, there is no merit in the view taken by the commissioner (appeals) that the appeal filed before him was barred by limitation.2. we had occasion to consider a similar matter in our final order no.642/02-a in appeal no. c/489/02/a. in the above order, we have taken the view that since the assessing authority have passed an order on the request made by the appellant and it was mentioned therein that an appeal would lie against that order before the commissioner (appeals) within three months from the date of the communication, the commissioner (appeals) could not have dismissed the appeal on the ground of delay. we follow the above view in this case also.3. we, therefore, set aside the order impugned and remand the matter to the commissioner (appeals) for being considered on merits after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellants.

Full Judgment

1. This is an appeal at the instance of the importer against order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) dt. 7-6-02. The order-in-original dt. 19-2-1999 was challenged before the Commissioner (Appeals). The appeal was dismissed on the ground that it was barred by limitation.

The appellant contended that since the order 19-2-99 is the first speaking order received by it, there is no merit in the view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals) that the appeal filed before him was barred by limitation.

2. We had occasion to consider a similar matter in our Final Order No.642/02-A in Appeal No. C/489/02/A. In the above order, we have taken the view that since the Assessing Authority have passed an order on the request made by the appellant and it was mentioned therein that an appeal would lie against that order before the Commissioner (Appeals) within three months from the date of the communication, the Commissioner (Appeals) could not have dismissed the appeal on the ground of delay. We follow the above view in this case also.

3. We, therefore, set aside the order impugned and remand the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for being considered on merits after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellants.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Dcm Engineering Products vs Commissioner of Customs Same Subject MRTP Same Judge K Usha, N T C.N.B.