2018 (5) TMI 827

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... : Mr.Kumar Vikram, Advocate for the Respondent: Mr.G.R. Singh, D.R. PER: S.K. MOHANTY Heard both sides 2. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order dated 05.04.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals-I), Jaipur, the appellant has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. The appeal was filed on 11.10.2017. Since there was inordinate delay in filing the appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....On the last date of hearing, the Bench directed the ld. AR for Revenue for ascertaining the fact regarding communication of the order to the applicant. Accordingly, the office of the Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur vide letter dated 20.02.2018 has confirmed that the impugned order dated 31.03.2011 was sent through registered post on 05.04.2011 to the applicant under Postal receipt No.1229. The Post....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....atch. Further, we also find that except the submission of the affidavit that the order was communicated on 24.07.2017, the applicant has not produced any other documents to prove such facts regarding communication of the order. Thus, we are of the considered view that the date of sending of the impugned order through registered post i.e. on 05.04.2011 should be considered as the date of communicat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly perused the judgments of the Apex Court in the matters of M.A. Mohammed Ismail's (supra) and in Raja Kumari (supra). We have also carefully examined Section 37C of the 1944 Act, Section 27 of the General Clauses Act and Section 144 of the Indian Evidence Act. Having examined, we are of the view that it can safely be said that sending the order at correct address by registered post is a sufficie....