2025 (7) TMI 346

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sed the appeal before him on the ground that the Appeal filed before him was barred by limitation. 2. Learned counsel for the Appellant has submitted that the copy of the Order-In-Original dated 28.04.2022 was received by them on 26.08.2022 pursuant to their request letter. The Appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) was filed on 11.11.2022 that is within the condonable period of one month, however, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) chose not to condone the delay. 3. The learned Authorized Representative has relied upon the findings arrived at by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the order under challenge. It is mentioned that there is no infirmity in those findings in light of the statutory mandate with the Commissioner (Appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....decisions, summons, etc. On and from 10.5.13, Speed post was made as one of the modes of service for orders, decisions, summons, etc., provided it is supported by proof of delivery. Therefore, it is clear that proof of service is mandatory for the service effected through speed post on and after 10.5.13, but prior to 10.5.13, service through speed post not being a recognized/approved mode of service as per the provisions of the Act, any service effected through speed post is not binding on the Appellant/assessee. It is trite law that limitation has to be reckoned only from the date when the actual service has been effected, subject to fulfilling the mandatory requirement of showing proof of delivery. 8. Hon'ble High Court of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f delivery, it cannot be said that that there is effective service of notice, as contemplated under Section 37C of the Act. (Emphasis). In the absence of service of notice of personal hearing, the petitioners or their representative could not remain present before the adjudicating authority during the course of personal hearing and hence, the impugned order which has been passed ex parte is clearly in reach of principles of natural justice." 10. In Saral Wire Craft Pvt. Ltd. v. CC. CE & ST [2015 (7) TMI 894 - Supreme Court] where adjudication order was served on kitchen boy of the assessee, it was held to be not a proper service, As per section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944, notice must be served to the person for whom it is intend....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lay is not condoned, the appeal goes out of consideration at the threshold. I find that that Apex Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Anantnag And Another Vs. Mst. Katiji And Others [1987 (28) ELT 185 (SC)] has held that no one shall prefer to cause prejudice to himself by a belated appeal. I am also conscious of the Apex Court judgment in the case of N. Balakrlshna Vs. M. Krishnamurthy [2009 (228) ELT 162 (SC)]. Reason for the delay has primacy over length of delay. 13. In the present case the date of receipt of order is 26.08.2022. Commissioner (Appeals) has recorded that copy of the order was provided to the Appellant vide letter dated 26.08.2022. Though it is simultaneously mentioned that the said Order-in-Original was pr....