Effective service governs limitation in service tax appeals, and doubtful proof of delivery cannot bar a timely appeal.

For service tax appeals, limitation runs from the date the impugned order is actually received or effectively communicated to the aggrieved person. Where the department relies on service under section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944, it must produce reliable proof of delivery; a doubtful acknowledgement card and inconclusive records do not establish valid service. On the facts noted, the appellant's claim that the order was first communicated on 23.11.2015 was accepted, so the appeal filed on 14.01.2016 was within time and could not be rejected as time-barred. The limitation objection was therefore unsustainable, and the matter was remitted for decision on merits in accordance with natural justice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal before the first appellate authority was barred by limitation on the ground that the order-in-original had already been served on the appellant.

Analysis: The period of limitation under section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994 runs from the date on which the impugned order is received by the aggrieved person. The manner of service contemplated by section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 required reliable proof of service. The acknowledgement card and departmental records did not convincingly establish that the order-in-original had been received by a responsible person of the appellant, and the signature on the card appeared doubtful. The appellant's stand that the order was first communicated to it on 23.11.2015 was therefore accepted, making the appeal filed on 14.01.2016 timely.

Conclusion: The dismissal of the appeal as time-barred was unsustainable and was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The limitation objection was rejected, the appellate order was annulled, and the matter was sent back to the first appellate authority for decision on merits after observing natural justice.

Ratio Decidendi: For computing limitation in service tax appeals, the decisive date is the date of effective service or communication of the order, and where service is not reliably proved, an appeal cannot be rejected as time-barred.

---