Service on Customs House Agent did not start limitation for importer's appeal; delay dismissal was set aside.

Service of an adjudication order on a Customs House Agent did not amount to service on the importer where the agent was not shown to be the importer's authorised representative. Limitation for filing the appeal therefore had to run from the date the importer actually received the order, not from service on the agent. On that basis, the appeal was filed within two months and was not time-barred. The dismissal for delay was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether service of the adjudication order on the Customs House Agent could be treated as service on the importer for computing limitation, and whether the appeal was therefore time-barred.

Analysis: The Customs House Agent was not shown to be the authorised representative of the importer. Service on the Customs House Agent, in the circumstances of the case, could not determine the date from which limitation for filing the appeal was to be reckoned. The relevant date was the date on which the importer received the order, and the appeal had been filed within two months from that date.

Conclusion: The appeal was within limitation and the order of dismissal on the ground of delay was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for consideration of the appeal on merits.

---