2025 (10) TMI 1473

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant arrayed the sequence of the facts of the case and vehemently argued that the demand is barred by limitation as the Appellant has not received the Show Cause Notice [SCN]. 3. I find that it would be appropriate to first examine the facts of the case which are briefly stated as under:- (a) The Appellant is engaged in providing "Mandap Keeper, Pandal and Shamiana Services" and was issued a SCN dated 29.12.2020 demanding Service Tax amounting to Rs. 6,23,139/- for the period 2015-16 with proposal to impose penalty and recover interest under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994. (b) It is the case of the Appellant that he has not received the impugned SCN, but only received the notice dated 12.04.2022 for perso....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s the stamp of the office. 7. The Revenue on the other hand could not produce any document evidencing receipt/acknowledgment of the SCN by the Appellant. The Appellant has been agitating this issue right from the Adjudication stage but neither the Adjudicating Authority nor the Commissioner (Appeals) could lay hands on any tangible evidence regarding the service of the SCN. 8. During the course of hearing before this Bench, the Bench also called for the proof of dispatch of the SCN which has been produced by the Revenue in the form of copy of "Dispatch Register" which indicates that the SCN has been dispatched by post. "S.Post" was also found written against dispatch number of the article. Hence, it can be inferred that the postal art....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or notice by speed post with proof of delivery - No material by way of proof of delivery of notice to petitioners produced - Impugned ex parte is clearly in breach of principles of natural justice. [para 8]" 12. Further, the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of R.P. Casting Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CESTAT, New Delhi reported in 2016 (344) E.L.T. 168 (Raj.) observed thus :- "Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Limitation - Condonation of delay - Service of order - No evidence adduced by Department to show that order served upon assessee as copy sent by registered post not received by him - Said service not in terms of statutory provision which require service of order by registered post Acknowledgment Due (AD)." 13. The Tribunal in ....