Deemed service by registered post can trigger limitation where later receipt is unsupported by independent rebuttal evidence.

An order dispatched by registered post to the correct address was treated as duly communicated on the date of dispatch, because section 37C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, made applicable to proceedings under the Finance Act, 1994, deems service when an order is tendered or delivered by post. A bare affidavit asserting later receipt, without independent rebuttal evidence, was insufficient to displace the presumption arising from registered-post dispatch supported by postal records. On these facts, the delay remained unexplained and the appeal was barred by limitation and not entertainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned order was duly communicated on the date it was sent by registered post so as to render the appeal time-barred and incapable of being entertained.

Analysis: The office of the Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed dispatch of the order by registered post, supported by the postal receipt and dispatch register. Under section 37C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, made applicable to proceedings under the Finance Act, 1994, an order is deemed to be served when tendered or delivered by post. The appellant produced only an affidavit claiming later receipt and no independent material to rebut the presumption arising from registered-post dispatch to the correct address. On these facts, the date of dispatch was treated as the date of communication, and the delay of more than six and a half years remained unexplained.

Conclusion: The appeal was held to be barred by limitation and was not entertainable.

---