9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 699X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the previous occasion, there was direction to find out service of adjudication order. The appellant was given hearing by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). In para 7 of the order, he has recorded the relevant part as under: "In the instant case, the Revenue has brought on record the said report of postal department as proof of actual delivery of the said registered letter to the addressee. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd and also as per the provisions of section 37-C of the Central Excise Act, 1944." 2. Learned Counsel says that there is an affidavit filed by the Director of the appellant indicating the persons on whom service of adjudication order was made. Appellant had no authorized person. Therefore, the above finding at page 3 of the appellate order is baseless. 3. We have perused the adjudication order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting authority in accordance with law. 5. Learned Counsel relies upon the judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of R.K. Agarwal v. CESTAT 2008 (221) ELT 486 (All.) to submit that there was no service of adjudication order. We have noticed that Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in para 11 of the judgment found that there was nothing on record to establish that the petitioner in that case auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of CCE v. Mohan bottling Co (P.) Ltd. 2010 (255) ELT 321 where it was held that it is for the assessee to rebut presumption of service by cogent evidence that in fact order was never served upon him. Order of Larger Bench of the Tribunal passed on 28.8.2006 in favour of the respondent was reversed. Larger Bench of Tribunal in that case had hel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
