Appeal by post is filed on actual receipt, not posting, where the statute gives no express postal filing right.

Where a statute does not expressly permit filing an appeal by post, the appeal is treated as filed only on actual receipt by the appellate authority, not on the date of posting. Applying that principle to the Central Excises and Salt Act, the Tribunal held that the governing rule was receipt, not dispatch, and that the point had already been settled by the Supreme Court. The request for reference to the High Court was therefore not maintainable, and the application failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for an appeal sent by post under the Central Excises and Salt Act, the date of posting or the date of actual receipt in the office of the appellate authority is the date of filing, and whether a reference to the High Court was warranted on that question.

Analysis: The Tribunal noted that there was divergence in High Court decisions on whether an appeal posted within time but received later should be treated as filed on the date of posting or the date of receipt. It then relied on the Supreme Court's ruling that, in the absence of any specific provision allowing filing by post, the appeal is filed only when it is actually received by the appellate authority. Since the statutory scheme under the Central Excises and Salt Act was similar, the Tribunal held that the governing rule was the date of receipt and that the question had already been settled by the Supreme Court.

Conclusion: The request for reference was not maintainable, and the application failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute does not expressly provide for filing an appeal by post, the appeal is filed on actual receipt by the appellate authority, not on the date of posting.

---