- (1.) The Court: This writ petition is directed against four orders in original passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Group-IV) followed by a communication being S60(Misc)-07/10A Gr IV dated April 24, 2012 of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Appraising Group-IV, Custom Houses, Kolkata, demanding a total sum of Rs.8,14,660/- along with interest under threat of recovery action under the Customs Act, 1962. The orders in original under challenge are as follows: JUDGEMENT_112_LAWS(CAL)6_2012_1.html
(2.) The orders claiming duty were passed on the sole ground that the petitioners had not produced the requisite end use certificate of use of the imported goods in their manufacturing factory/unit within the time prescribed.
(3.) Mr. J. P. Khaitan appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the impugned orders in original have been passed without issuing any showcause notice to the petitioners. The orders impugned also do not reveal that any show-cause notice or any other notice had been issued. Prima facie it appears that end use certificate has been issued by the Superintendent(Tech), Central Excise, Durgapur-II Division, certifying that the goods imported against the Bills of Entry being the subject matter of the impugned orders in original had been utilised by the petitioners for the purpose of manufacture of Billet & M.S. Ingot falling under Sub-Heading No.7207.1920 & 7206.1090 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 in their factory/manufacturing unit at Banskopa, Rajbandh, Durgapur-12. It is true that the petitioners filed a belated appeal with an application for condonation of delay. However, the appeal was not entertained as the same was barred by limitation and rightly dismissed. The Appellate Authority had no power to condone the delay. These observations are prima facie. The appeal before the Central Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has also been dismissed with the observation that there was no provision whereby the Commissioner of Appeals could condone delay beyond 60 days.;