TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1992 (10) TMI 177
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R, for the Respondents. [Order per : T.P. Nambiar, Member (J)]. - These are four Miscellaneous Applications filed by the above-captioned applicants praying that the delay, if any, in filing the appeals be condoned. In all the applications, similar grounds are mentioned and the matters involved in all the applications are the same. We propose to dispose of the applications by a common o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d the same within a reasonable period. Therefore, the averments of the applicants that they have received the impugned orders only on 16-8-1991 cannot be accepted. In support of his contention he also drew our attention to the Departmental Records. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. It is now seen that the case of the applicants is that they had not received the impugned o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ipt in the concerned file to show that the same were despatched to the applicants by post office. He also stated that there is no acknowledgement of these applicants in the file to show that the impugned orders were served on them on any date prior to 16-8-1991. But he strongly relied on the notings made in the file by the concerned officials that they were actually issued on 22-3-1990. We have al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....able in the concerned case file and the presumption cannot be drawn merely because of an official note made in the concerned record that the orders were despatched on 22-3-1990. The applicants had also filed affidavits before the Additional Collector stating that they had not received the orders in question. Considering those affidavits the applicants were given copies of the impugned orders by th....