M/S Ds Cargo Agency vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The Petitioner, M/s DS Cargo Agency, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking an extension of the limitation period to file an appeal against an order dated March 5, 2025, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeal). The Petitioner had initially been granted one month from July 7, 2025, to file the appeal, with specific directions regarding pre-deposit. The Petitioner's counsel stated that they needed a few more working days to file the appeal. The Respondent argued that sufficient time had already been granted. The impugned order was passed by the Adjudicating Authority, and the appeal was to be filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Held
The Court decided to grant a further extension for filing the appeal. The Petitioner, M/s DS Cargo Agency, and its sole proprietor, Mr. Diva Kant Jha, were granted time to file their respective appeals by September 25, 2025. The Court held that if the appeals were filed within this extended period, they would not be dismissed on the ground of limitation. The Court explicitly stated that no further extension for filing the appeal would be granted. The application for extension was disposed of on these terms. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Petitioner, M/s DS Cargo Agency, and its sole proprietor, Mr. Diva Kant Jha, should be permitted to file their respective appeals against the impugned order dated March 5, 2025, beyond the original limitation period, considering the previous order dated July 7, 2025, and the present application for extension. This issue turns on the interpretation and application of Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962, and the Court's inherent power to grant extensions. Petitioner's contention: The Petitioner argued that they required a few more working days to file the appeal, necessitating an extension of the already granted period. Respondent's contention: The Respondent contended that sufficient time had already been granted to the Petitioner and opposed further extension.
Sections Cited
Section 128, Section 129E
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2025
This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 57061/2025 in W.P.(C) 9222/2025
The present application has been filed by the Petitioner under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking extension of the limitation period for filing appeal against the impugned order dated 5th March, 2025, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeal), New Customs House, Near IGI Airport, New Delhi (hereinafter ‘impugned order’). As per the order dated 7th July, 2025 passed by this Court, one month’s time was given to file the appeal. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:
“7. The order in question has been passed by the Adjudicating Authority and in terms of Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962 the same is appealable to the Commissioner (Appeals). The difficulty that the Petitioner’s Counsel expresses is that the Petitioner would have to file a pre-deposit amount under Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 to the tune of 7.5 % of the total penalties which have been imposed on the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/09/2025 at 12:25:04
Petitioner as also its proprietor.
It is the settled position in law that a sole proprietary concern does not have any distinct identity from the sole proprietor. Accordingly, in the present case, the Petitioner is permitted to file an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. The sole proprietor is also permitted to file an appeal to the Commissioner appeals. However, the pre-deposit of 7.5 % would be only in respect of Rs. 60,00,000/- which is the amount, imposed as penalty, upon the sole proprietor of the Petitioner concern.
Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner also submits that the limitation period to file the appeal against the impugned order has expired on 05th June, 2025. The present writ petition was filed on 30th May, 2025 before this Court.
In view thereof, the Petitioners, Mr. Diva Kant Jha and M/s DS Cargo Agency are granted a period of one month to file their respective appeals against the impugned order. If the appeals are filed within one month, along with the pre-deposit as directed above, the same shall not be dismissed on the ground of limitation. The appeals shall be adjudicated on merits.”
Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that he needs 3 to 4 more working days to file the appeal.
Ld. Counsel for the Respondent submits that the sufficient time has already been granted in this matter.
For the reasons stated in the application, considering that the limitation has expired long back, let the appeal be filed now by 25th September, 2025. If the same is filed within the said time, it shall not be dismissed on the ground of limitation. No further extension for filing the appeal shall be granted in this matter.
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/09/2025 at 12:25:04
Application is disposed of in these terms.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
SHAIL JAIN, J. SEPTEMBER 10, 2025 Rahul/Sm
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/09/2025 at 12:25:04
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.