https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778443 CESTAT found the appeal barred by limitation was nonetheless to be condoned and remanded. The Tribunal held the revenue failed to prove service under Section 37C(1)(a) by acknowledgement of Registered/Speed Post, so the Commissioner(Appeals) erred in presuming delivery. The assessee's stated service date was accepted, the short delay to first appeal within the 30-day condonable period was excused, and the matter was remitted to the Commissioner(Appeals) to decide the appeal on merits without revisiting limitation. en-us Thu, 04 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Sep 2025 08:31:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778443 CESTAT found the appeal barred by limitation was nonetheless to be condoned and remanded. The Tribunal held the revenue failed to prove service under Section 37C(1)(a) by acknowledgement of Registered/Speed Post, so the Commissioner(Appeals) erred in presuming delivery. The assessee's stated service date was accepted, the short delay to first appeal within the 30-day condonable period was excused, and the matter was remitted to the Commissioner(Appeals) to decide the appeal on merits without revisiting limitation. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 04 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778443