2025 (9) TMI 932

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nce the Appellant was not aware of any such order and the demand of Service Tax raised on him, he immediately contacted the jurisdictional division office where he was informed about the Order-In-Original was dispatched by post but no details were provided to him. However, on request, an attested copy of the Order-In-Original was served on him on 20.04.2023 and accordingly, the appeal was filed before the First Appellate Authority on 05.07.2023. On the last date of hearing i.e. 18.08.2025, the Bench had directed the learned Authorized Representative for the Department to get a copy of the dispatch record from the jurisdictional office evidencing method of dispatch of the Order-In-Original. Today, learned Departmental Representative has filed a letter dated 28.06.2025, received from the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Raebareli Division, alongwiths copy of the relevant page of the Dak Despatch Register. The letter is being reproduced as under:- 3. I find from the above letter received from the jurisdictional office, that the Order-In-Original was dispatched on 12.09.2022 vide Registered Post and serial number of the Dak Despatch Register has been mentioned, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s under:- "10. It is in these circumstances that we are of the clear conclusion that a miscarriage of justice has taken place, in that the Authorities/Courts below have failed to notice the specific language of Section 37C(a) of the Act which requires that an order must be tendered on the concerned person or his authorized agent, in other words, on no other person, to ensure efficaciousness. We must immediately recall the decision in Taylor v. Taylor - (1875) 1 Ch. D 426, rendered venerable by virtue of its jural acceptance and applicable for over a century. It was approved by the Privy Council in Nazir Ahmad v. King Emperor - (1935-36) 63 IA 372 and was subsequently applied in Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh v. State of Vindhya Pradesh - AIR 1954 SC 322, State of UP v. Singhara Singh - AIR 1964 SC 358, Babu Verghese v. Bar Council of Kerala - (1999) 3 SCC 422 and more recently in Hussein Ghadially v. State of Gujarat - (2014) 8 SCC 425. As observed by this Court in Babu Verghese, "it is the basic principle of law long settled that if the manner of doing a particular act is prescribed under any statute, the act must be done in that manner or not at all." The Inspector who ostensibl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....023 has to be accepted by all concerned. I further observe that the appeal before the First Appellate Authority was filed beyond the statutory period of 60 days but within the condonable period of 30 day and accordingly, I find it appropriate to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before the First Appellate Authority and remand the matter to the learned Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal on merits without further visiting the aspect of limitation. All issues are kept open. The Appellant is also directed to cooperate in the remand proceedings and not to seek unnecessary adjournments. The appeal filed by the Appellant is allowed by way of remand to the learned Commissioner (Appeals). (Dictated and pronounced in open court) ============= Document 1 उपसहायक आयुक्त कार्यालय Office of the Dy/Assistant Commissioner केन्द्रीय माल एवं सेवाकर तथा केन्द्रीय उत्पाà....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ध्यम एवं दिनांक के सम्बन्ध में आख्या मांगी गई है. का सन्दर्भ लें। उक्त सम्बन्ध में, बिन्दुवार वांछित आख्या निम्नवत है- 1. उक्त मूल आदेश को डिस्पैच रजिस्टर के अनुसार दिनांक 12.09.2022 को डिस्पैच सं. 557 (डिस्पैच रजिस्टर की छायाप्रति संलग्न) के à¤....