2014 (7) TMI 1136

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. The learned Counsel on behalf of the appellants drew the attention of the Bench to the relevant portion of the COD application, as under :- "5. Till July 2009, the aforesaid premises housed the Finance and Administration ('F&A') Departments of the Applicant besides the Switching Centre and technical personnel. With effect from August, 2009, the F&A Departments moved to "Nalavinda Complex", Peelamedu, Coimbatore. Hence, the administrative support and security services with respect to the CODISSIA Towers premises were outsourced to M/s. ISS Integrated Facility Service Pvt. Ltd., vide agreement, dated 10-7-2012. A copy of the agreement entered between the Applicant and ISS is attached as Annexure-A. 6. Under the agr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... delay in filing the above appeal. He also relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector; Land Acquisition Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji and Ors. reported in 1987 (28) E.L.T. 185 (S.C.). 4. On the other hand, the learned Authorised Representative on behalf of the Revenue submits that the impugned order was served on 10-5-2012. The applicant had not disputed the service of the order to their agent M/s. ISS Integrated Facility Service Pvt. Ltd. as it is evident from the letter dated 13-5-2013. It is clearly evident from the document of postal authorities that the order was served to the appellant's office on 19-5-2012. He also submits that the acknowledgement of the postal receipt is bearing the stamp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....be ascertained that the order should be sent by Regd. Post with acknowledgement due to the person to whom it is intended or to his authorised agent, if any. In the present case, it is evident from the Registered Post acknowledgement due that the order was received with the seal of the appellant company. It is seen from the internal communication to the security service by letter dated 13-5-2013 that the security company had not placed the order to the appellant-Company. The relevant portion of the said order is reproduced below :- "Sub : Deficiency in service - Non-delivery of mails received from Service Tax Department - Reg. ******** During the period up to Dec. 2012, you were engaged for providing Office Assistants at our office ....