Statutory service by affixture defeated a belated non-service plea, and the long-delayed appeals were barred by limitation.

Service of an adjudication order complied with the statutory mode when it was sent by registered post and, after that failed, affixed on the Customs House notice board. On the admitted facts, the applicants could not show sufficient cause for a delay of about ten years in filing the appeals, and a bare plea of non-service did not justify condonation. Precedents relied on were found inapplicable because they involved materially different facts, including disputes about the date of service. The Tribunal rejected condonation of delay and refused to entertain the appeals as barred by limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay of about ten years in filing the appeals should be condoned on the ground that the adjudication order was not duly served on the applicants and, consequently, whether the appeals could be entertained within limitation.

Analysis: The service record showed that the adjudication order had been sent by registered post and, when that mode failed, it was affixed on the notice board of the Customs House in accordance with the statutory mode of service. The fact of affixture was also noted in the revenue's reply before the High Court and was not disputed. The precedents relied upon by the applicants were held inapplicable because they dealt with different facts, including situations where the date of service was not in dispute. On the admitted facts, the applicants had no sufficient cause for the extraordinary delay.

Conclusion: The request for condonation of delay was rejected, and the appeals were not entertained as barred by limitation.

Final Conclusion: The procedural challenge based on non-service failed, and the Tribunal refused to extend limitation, resulting in dismissal of the applications and the connected appeals.

Ratio Decidendi: Where service of an adjudication order is effected in the manner prescribed by statute, including affixture after unsuccessful postal service, a belated appeal cannot be saved by a bald assertion of non-service or by invoking inapplicable precedents.

---