Proof of statutory service and interim stay on interest demand granted where the substantive issue was before a Larger Bench.

Service of an adjudicatory order must be proved in the statutory mode prescribed under Section 37C(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944; where dispatch is shown only by speed post and valid service is not established, limitation cannot be enforced against the appellant. On that basis, the appeal was treated as within time and the condonation request became infructuous. The Tribunal also granted interim stay of the order sustaining interest demand, noting that the underlying question relating to interest on delayed payment of duty against supplementary invoices was already pending before a Larger Bench.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the appeal was delayed on account of valid service of the impugned order; and (ii) whether the operation of the impugned order sustaining the demand of interest should be stayed.

Issue (i): Whether the appeal was delayed on account of valid service of the impugned order.

Analysis: Service of the order was required to be effected by registered post with acknowledgment due under Section 37C(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The record indicated dispatch by speed post and there was no evidence of valid service on the appellants. In the absence of proof of service, the benefit of doubt was extended to the appellants and the claim that there was no delay was accepted.

Conclusion: The appeal was held to be within time and the condonation application was dismissed as infructuous.

Issue (ii): Whether the operation of the impugned order sustaining the demand of interest should be stayed.

Analysis: The demand of interest arose from delay in payment of duty on the additional amount received against supplementary invoices. The underlying issue had already been referred to a Larger Bench of the Tribunal, and that circumstance weighed in favour of grant of interim protection.

Conclusion: Stay of operation of the impugned order was granted.

Final Conclusion: The order granted interim relief to the appellants by staying the impugned demand and by declining to treat the appeal as time-barred, while leaving the merits of the dispute to be considered separately.

Ratio Decidendi: Where service of an adjudicatory order is not proved in the manner prescribed by the statute, limitation cannot be fastened against the appellant; and a stay may be granted where the substantive issue is already pending before a Larger Bench.

---