https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784069 The dominant issue was whether service of the adjudication order was effected in accordance with s.37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 so as to trigger limitation for filing appeal. The Tribunal held that s.37C mandates service by tendering to the intended person/authorised agent or by specified postal/courier modes, with deemed service only on compliance with those modes; alleged delivery to "security personnel" at a local office required a clear finding on statutory compliance. As the appellate authority failed to determine whether s.37C was duly followed, the impugned rejection as time-barred was set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to examine proper service and pass a fresh order in accordance with law. en-us Tue, 07 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Dec 2025 08:56:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784069 The dominant issue was whether service of the adjudication order was effected in accordance with s.37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 so as to trigger limitation for filing appeal. The Tribunal held that s.37C mandates service by tendering to the intended person/authorised agent or by specified postal/courier modes, with deemed service only on compliance with those modes; alleged delivery to "security personnel" at a local office required a clear finding on statutory compliance. As the appellate authority failed to determine whether s.37C was duly followed, the impugned rejection as time-barred was set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to examine proper service and pass a fresh order in accordance with law. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 07 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784069