KHALID MEHMOOD VS CUSTOMS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
2019 P T D 613
[Lahore High Court]
Before Shahid Jamil Khan and Asim Hafeez, JJ
KHALID MEHMOOD and another
Versus
CUSTOMS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL and 3 others
Customs Reference No.118360 of 2017, heard on 05/12/2018.
Customs Act (IV of 1969)---
----Ss. 194A & 196---Reference application---Appeal to Appellate Tribunal---Limitation---Condonation of delay---Explanation of delay of each day---Scope---Petitioner was aggrieved of Appellate Tribunal's orderwherebyitdismissedhisappealbeingbarredbytime---Validity---No explanation was provided to explain the delay, except evasive submissions---Noexplanationwasprovidedquathetimespent---AppellateTribunalhadrightlydeclinedtocondonethe delay---Reference application, being without merits, was dismissed.
Baqir Hussain for Applicants.
Nadeem Mehmood Mian for Respondents
Date of hearing: 5th December, 2018.
JUDGMENT
ASIM HAFEEZ J.---Through this reference application, the applicant impugns order dated 10.07.2017 by the Customs Appellate Tribunal ("the Tribunal"), whereby appeal filed by the applicant was dismissed being time barred. i.e. filed after delay of 298 days.
2.At the outset, we asked the learned counsel for the applicant to explain delay in the filing of appeal, the reason put forward was that copy of the order of the Collector Adjudication was not delivered to the applicant. It was submitted that applicant filed application on 28.01.2016, for seeking copy of the order-in-original dated 30.11.2015 and the copy was delivered on 04.08.2016, whereafter the appeal was filed on 01.10.2016. We have examined the application filed before the Appellate Tribunal for seeking condonation of time for condoning delay, which was dismissed by the Tribunal, being devoid of sufficient reason, a condition required to be met by the Tribunal before exercising power under subsection (5) of section 194-A of the Customs Act, 1969. We have examined the order of the Tribunal, which has dealt with the issue. It is apparent from the application that no explanation was provided to explain the delay, except evasive submissions. There was no explanation qua the time spent, even as per the admission of the applicant that copy of the order dated 30.11.2015 was received on 04.08.2016, from the date of receipt of the copy and filing of the appeal. We have examined the order of the Tribunal, which had discussed the factum of delivery of the order-in-original upon perusal of the dispatch register and was not convinced to condone the delay.
3.We are not inclined to exercise jurisdiction. Since the appeal was decided on the question of limitation only and no ground for any interference is made out, we do not intend to discuss the merits of the case. There is no misapplication of the law. The determination of the Tribunal qua factum of delivery of the order suffers from no perversity or legal infirmity.
4.In view of the aforesaid, this reference application is without merits and same is, therefore, dismissed.
5.Office shall send a copy of this order under the seal of the Court to the learned Customs Appellate Tribunal as per Section 196(5) of the Customs Act, 1969.
SA/K-1/LApplication dismissed.