TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 426X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case - matter remanded back – appeal allowed in the favour of the assessee - Appeal No.ST/687/2011 - - - Dated:- 25-9-2012 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran and Mr. B.S.V. Murthy, JJ. For the Respondent: Shri Manoj Kutty, A.R JUDGEMENT Per: M.V. Ravindran: This matter is listed today for ascertaining the status of verification from the office of Commissioner of Service Tax Ahmedabad whether the Order-in-Original No. STC/AD-41/JC/D-III/08, dt.29.12.08 was dispatched to the assessee or not. 2. After hearing both sides for some time on the Stay Petition, we find that the appeal itself could be disposed at this juncture as the first appellate authority has dismissed the appeal on the question of limitation. 3. The relevant fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Sr. Superintendent of Post Office has specifically stated in reply to RTI query that this disclosure cannot be made to them as it is third party information. It is also his submission that the Department did not produce acknowledgement card wherein there is no evidence of receipt of Order-in-Original by the appellant. 5. On 21.08.2012, when the matter was heard, we found that the dispatch register as annexed by the appellant along with reply received under RTI query, we find that there was no mention of the appellant s name in the serial number entered for communication of Order-in-Original. We, by our miscellaneous order dt.21.08.2012, after granting interim stay to the appellant, directed the ld. Commissioner of Service Tax, Ahmeda ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rusal of these entries suggests that none of these pertain to the dispatch of the said OIO and therefore, they are not relevant for the purpose of verification. 4. The above report may please be placed before the Hon.Court in terms of Order No. S/1751/WZB/AHD/2012, dt.21.08.2012 Copy to Commissioner (Authorised Representative), CESTAT, WZB, Meghani Nagar, Ahmedabad for information and necessary action. 7. It can be seen from the above reproduced letter that the appellant s request under RTI was for providing the copy of the dispatch register for the year 2008-2009, while the lower authorities have provided him a copy of dispatch register for the year 2009-2010. The investigation report of the ld. Commissioner also indicates that they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
