Deemed service under Central Excise law requires actual tender or delivery; limitation cannot rest on mere registered-post dispatch.

Under Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, deemed service depends on actual tender, delivery, or service in the prescribed manner, not merely dispatch by registered post. The appellate authority had not ascertained when the original order was in fact served and therefore could not properly decide whether the appeal was time-barred; on that basis, the limitation rejection was unsustainable and the matter required fresh consideration of service and limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate order rejecting the petitioner's appeal as barred by limitation could stand when the date of service of the original order was not ascertained for the purpose of deemed service under Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis: The appeal was rejected solely on the assumption that dispatch of the order by registered post amounted to service. Under Section 37C(1) and Section 37C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the decisive fact is the date on which the order was actually tendered or delivered, or otherwise served in the manner prescribed. The appellate authority did not determine when the order dated 21.01.2011 was in fact tendered or delivered to the petitioner and therefore did not examine whether the appeal filed in 2013 was within limitation on the basis of legally recognised service.

Conclusion: The rejection of the appeal on limitation was unsustainable, the appellate order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration of the issue of service and limitation.

---