9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 865X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the appellant preferred an appeal on 30.12.2010 alongwith an application seeking condonation of delay. The appellant claimed to have received information that the Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut-I had issued an order (Adjudication) in relation to the show cause notice dated 15.01.2009; thereafter appellant addressed a letter to the adjudication Commissioner on 12.08.2010 for furnishing the adjudication order dated 01.04.2010; the Commissioner did not respond; that pursuant to telephonic conversation with the office Superintendent it was informed that the order-in-original may have been delivered from Range Service Tax Dehradun, but the order was not delivered; on 06.09.2010 the Range Superintendent was again addressed but without ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the Tribunal, by 23.01.2013. The matter was adjourned from time to time thereafter. On 02.09.2013 an order was passed permitting Revenue to contest the averments in the COD application by an affidavit pleading relevant facts pertaining to service of adjudication order on the appellant. The appellant was also directed to file an affidavit in response by 28.10.2013; and the CoD application was directed to be listed for hearing on 04.11.2013, in the presence of representatives of both parties. The jurisdictional Commissioner filed an affidavit dated 13.09.2013 stating that the adjudication order was passed on 29.01.2010; was duly served upon Shri Kushal Mani, PM on 28.04.2010 through the Range Service tax, Dehradun under a proper acknowled ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... av, Accounts Officer (Cash), BSNL Dehradun filed an affidavit pleading that the deponent is serving as Accounts Officer (Cash); that the adjudication order was not received according to the statement of the then Accounts Officer Shri Kamlesh Sharma; however, the said order was shown to him; and that this affidavit is being filed on the basis of the statement of then Accounts Officer Shri Kamlesh Sharma. 4. The affidavit dated 21.11.2013 filed on behalf of the appellant does not advert to the affidavit of the jurisdictional Commissioner, which clearly asserts that the adjudication order was served on Shri Kushal Mani on 28.04.2010, acknowledged by Shri Kushal Mani as the Accounts Officer (Cash) of the appellant; nor does the affidavit deny, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on acknowledging such receipt as the Accounts Officer (Cash) of the appellant; except stating vaguely that the order was not signed by the then Accounts Officer Shri Kamlesh Sharma. 7. From the affidavits dated 13.09.2013 of the jurisdictional Commissioner and the one dated 21.11.2013 filed on behalf of the appellant, the inference is compelling that the order-in-original was served on Shri K. Mani who had acknowledged receipt of the adjudication order on 28.04.2010 representing himself to be the Accounts Officer (Cash) of the appellant. This acknowledgement is not only signed but also bears official stamp of the appellant's office. The fact is not disputed in the affidavit dated 21.11.2013. 8. Learned Counsel for the appellant conten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
