2004 (2) TMI 489

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....03 in the normal course. Unfortunately, since the Appellants were away from Chennai for attending a marriage in Rajasthan, they were not in a position to file this Appeal within the time limit. They could do so only on 4-9-2003. The delay is condoned. 2. After hearing the rival submissions, I feel the Appeal itself can be disposed off on a short issue. 3. Appellant had lodged a claim seeking Abatement during the period of closure of factory, i.e., October, 1998 before the Commissioner of Central Excise. However, they did not receive any intimation about the fate of their Abatement Claim. During the Adjudication proceedings before the Lower Authority, the Appellant submitted that their claim for Abatement was pending before t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ered post with acknowledgement due, to the person for whom it is intended or his authorised agent, if any; (b)         if the decision, order, summons or notice cannot be served in the manner provided in clause (a), by affixing a copy thereof to some conspicuous part of the factory or warehouse or other place of business or usual place of residence of the person for whom such decision, order, summons or notice, as the case may be, is intended; (c)          if the decision, order, summons or notice cannot be served in the manner provided in clauses (a) and (b), by affixing a copy thereof on the notice board of the officer of authority who or which pass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a specific submission has been made about non-receipt of the CCE Order on the Abatement request. The Official Channels remained supremely indifferent and went on to place reliance on a document which was adverse to the Appellant thereby committing a gross violation of natural justice. 10. The unpleasant repercussion of such unexplainable lassitude is the fact that from the apparent date of despatch on 8-10-1998, five long years have gone by. The Appellant is in the dark about his Abatement claim filed before the Commissioner. However, the Lower Adjudicator despite being informed about Abatement Order not being received, has placed reliance on a rejection order, available in the Office File and proceeded to pass the impugned order. F....