Appeal allowed for timely filing; lack of proof of service overlooked, remanded for fair reconsideration.

The appeal was allowed as the Member (Judicial) found that the appellant filed the appeal within the permissible time frame after receiving the adjudication order. The Commissioner (Appeals) failed to consider the lack of proof of service, leading to the determination that the appeal was timely filed. The case was remanded for a reconsideration of the merits within 60 days to ensure a fair hearing and a thorough review of the case.

---

---

Issues: Appeal against dismissal of appeal as time barred.

Analysis:
1. The appellant appealed against an order dismissing their appeal as time-barred, claiming they did not receive the adjudication order until 2019, despite recovery notices being sent in 2017. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the dismissal.

2. The appellant argued that they only received the adjudication order in 2019, requested a copy from the department, and filed the appeal upon receipt. The Authorized Representative contended that recovery notices were sent in 2017, and the appellant failed to respond, justifying the time-barred dismissal.

3. The Member (Judicial) noted that for filing an appeal, the adjudication order must be delivered to the assessee, who then has 60 days to appeal, extendable by 30 days with valid reasons. As there was no proof of service, the date of receipt was considered as 10.12.2020, and the appeal filed on 15.2.2021 was deemed timely. The impugned order was set aside.

4. Additionally, the Commissioner (Appeals) did not address the case's merits. Therefore, the matter was remanded for reconsideration within 60 days of the order, granting the appellant a fair hearing. The appeal was disposed of through remand, ensuring a thorough review of the case on its merits.

---