https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328655 The appeal was allowed as the court determined that the order was sent via ordinary post, not registered AD as claimed by the Commissioner. The date of receipt was established as 26/4/2012, allowing the appeal filed on 04/6/2012 to be within the limitation period. The court emphasized the importance of accurate determination of receipt dates to ensure the right to appeal within the timeframe. The case was remanded for consideration on merits without the time bar objection, focusing on substantive issues rather than procedural technicalities. en-us Tue, 05 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Jan 2017 15:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328655 The appeal was allowed as the court determined that the order was sent via ordinary post, not registered AD as claimed by the Commissioner. The date of receipt was established as 26/4/2012, allowing the appeal filed on 04/6/2012 to be within the limitation period. The court emphasized the importance of accurate determination of receipt dates to ensure the right to appeal within the timeframe. The case was remanded for consideration on merits without the time bar objection, focusing on substantive issues rather than procedural technicalities. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 05 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328655