Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1824 - AT - Service TaxTime Limitation - Maintainability of appeal - appeal is rejected on the issue of time-bar by observing that the impugned order, was passed by the Adjudicating Authority on 31-3-2015, whereas the appeal stand filed before him on 25-1-2016 - HELD THAT:- The Appellate Authority has gone by the report of the office of the Assistant Commissioner indicating the dispatch of the order by speed post. There is no evidence of receiving of the order by the appellant. In terms of the provisions of Section 37C of Central Excise Act, 1944, any decision or order passed by an Authority shall be served by registered post with acknowledgement Due or by speed post with proof of delivery. As such it is seen that the said Section requires serving of any order either by registered post or by speed post with proof of delivery. However, there is no proof of delivery produced by the Revenue in the present case. In such a scenario, Commissioner (Appeals) was not right by taking the date of dispatch as the proof of delivery and to calculate the period from the said date by considering the same as relevant date. On the other hand the appellant have produced an affidavit of their employee to substantiate their plea that the impugned order was received by them on 7-12-2015 only. In the absence of any proof of delivery produced by the Revenue, we have to accept the date of receipt as shown by the appellant, in which case the appeal filed on 25-1-2016 would be within time - matter remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits.
|