DEBANGSU BASAK, J. - (1.) The petitioner has assailed an order passed by Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated March 15, 2012.
(2.) Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner has submitted that, the Customs authorities were required to issue a notice under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 prior to assessing the liability of the petitioner. In the present case, the Customs authorities did not do so. The Customs authorities has assessed the liability unilaterally and without notice. Although an appeal was filed, however, due to be circumstances beyond the control of the petitioner, the appeal provided under the Customs Act, 1962 was not preferred within the time period prescribed by the statute i.e. 60 days as also within the additional 30 days for which it can be condoned. The appeal was consequently dismissed. The Tribunal has also dismissed the appeal before it made at the behest of the petitioner on the same ground.
(3.) Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner has relied upon AIR 1986 SC 85 (State of U.P. v. Md. Nooh) in support of the proposition that a writ of certiorari can be issued where there is an error, irregularity or illegality touching the jurisdiction or procedure committed by an inferior Court or Tribunal of first instance and that existence of alternative remedy is no bar to the invocation of the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India.;