https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334002 Admitted receipt of the adjudication order defeated the limitation challenge, because the dispute was only about service through a watchman and speed post. The Tribunal held that once actual receipt of the communication was established, alleged invalid service under Section 37C(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not revive the appeal. It further treated speed post as falling within the statutory postal framework and distinguished the cited non-service precedent on the ground that receipt had not been proved there. The dismissal of the appeal as time-barred was sustained. en-us Fri, 09 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Nov 2016 18:04:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334002 Admitted receipt of the adjudication order defeated the limitation challenge, because the dispute was only about service through a watchman and speed post. The Tribunal held that once actual receipt of the communication was established, alleged invalid service under Section 37C(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not revive the appeal. It further treated speed post as falling within the statutory postal framework and distinguished the cited non-service precedent on the ground that receipt had not been proved there. The dismissal of the appeal as time-barred was sustained. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 09 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334002