2025 (8) TMI 1141

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Tax<br>DR. RACHNA GUPTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. A. K. JYOTISHI, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri A.K. Batra, Chartered Accountant for the Appellant Shri Anand Narayan, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER DR. RACHNA GUPTA The present order disposes of an application for condonation of delay of 335 days occurred in filing the present appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the app....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... premises on 25.09.2023 itself. The affidavit is contrary to the said fact. Application is prayed to be dismissed. 4. Having heard the rival contentions, we observe that the present appeal has been filed on 23.10.2024 against the order dated 12.07.2023, there is definitely a substantial delay in filing the impugned appeal. However, the fact is that after receiving the order of 12.07.2023 on 02.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to the request of the appellant vide letter dated 29.08.2024 requesting for the copy of ROM order. 6. Resultantly, there is no proof of service of the ROM order which is mandatory as per Section 37C of the Finance Act, 1994. Sub-section 1 (a) requires that the decision or order shall be served by tendering the same by registered post with AD or by speed post, but, to be delivered to the person....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ther person, to ensure efficaciousness -Decided in favour of assessee." 7. We observe that the order challenged in this appeal i.e. Order-in-Appeal dated 12.07.2023 though was received by the appellant on 02.09.2023. But, appellant filed the application seeking rectification in the said order on 12.09.2023 i.e. too promptly. The said application was decided vide order dated 14.09.2023. As alrea....