Valid service under Central Excise law upheld where order reached correct address and delay in appeal remained unexplained.

Service of an adjudication order at the correct address of the Managing Partner, received by a family member, was treated as sufficient compliance with Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The court held that service need not fail merely because it was not handed directly to the assessee, where the statutory mode of service was otherwise satisfied. The long delay in filing the appeal was also not condoned because the order had been served years earlier and no plausible explanation for the delay was shown. The dismissal of the appeal as time-barred was therefore upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether service of the adjudication order on the daughter-in-law of the Managing Partner at the correct address amounted to valid service under Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and whether the delay in filing the appeal could be condoned.

Analysis: Section 37C permits service of an order by tendering it to the person concerned or his authorised agent, or by registered post at the correct address. The order was admittedly delivered at the correct address of the Managing Partner and received by a member of his family. In these circumstances, the service was treated as sufficient compliance with the statutory mode of service. Since the order had been served in 2004 and no plausible explanation was offered for the long delay in approaching the appellate forum, the rejection of condonation of delay was held to be justified.

Conclusion: Service of the order was valid and the dismissal of the appeal as time-barred was upheld, which was against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

---