Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 179(3)

Summary: The High Court allowed the customs references, holding that the Order-in-Original was issued beyond the statutory limitation period prescribed under the Customs Act, 1969. Even after accounting for permissible extensions and adjournments, the delay exceeded the maximum allowable period. The Court declared the order void and held that no demand or coercive action could be based on such a time-barred order. The Tribunal’s failure to consider this jurisdictional defect was set aside.  Tagline  Order-in-Original beyond limitation — Maximum extension exhausted — Order void ab initio — Jurisdictional defect can be raised at any stage. ORDER; BABAR SATTAR, J.- Through this judgment this Court will decide Customs References No.47 and 48 of 2015. These references arise from a judgment of the Customs Appellate Tribunal (“Tribunal”) dated 01.09.2015. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the Order-in-Original was barred by limitation and was therefore void and no action could be taken against the applicant pursuant to such order. He submitted that the Show-Cause Notice was issued on 12.05.2008 and the Order-in-Original was issued on 20.03.2009. He submitted that while taking into account a period of 120 days permitted for issuance of an Order-in-Original, at the relevant time, under Section 179(3) of the Customs Act, 1969 (“Customs Act”), the Order-in-Original was still issued 64 days beyond the period of limitation. The learned counsel for the Customs Department submitted that the Order-in-Original had documented how the applicant continued to seek adjournments in Para-8 of such order, in view of which the Customs Department could not be blamed for not issuing the impugned order within a period of 120 days. We are not impressed by the arguments of the learned counsel for the Customs Department. Section 179(3) of the Customs Act provides that an Order-in-Original is to be issued within…