TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provisions of law. I accept the date of service of order as 23/6/09 as claimed by the appellant in view of no facts on record to the contrary. Accordingly, I set aside the impugned order and direct the learned Commissioner (Appeals) to hear the appellant on merits and dispose of the appeal in accordance with law - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. E/471/10-MUM - Final Order No. A/1649/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /4/09 assumed the date of receipt by the appellant on 18/4/09. It is evident from the order that there is no basis for such assumption. The appellant further states that the said dispatch of order by speed post was not served on them. When the Excise Officer of the appellant, Mr. SB Deole went to the office of the Department sometime in June, 2009, he came to know of the passing of the Order-in-Or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ier approved by the Central Board of Excise and Customs constituted under the Central Board of Revenue Act, 1963 have been added. Thus, according to the learned Counsel the essential element in service by post is acknowledgement due . Admittedly there is no acknowledgement available on record of the Revenue supporting the assumed date of service by the Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly it is fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the condonation cannot be allowed for such delay under the provisions even by the higher courts. 5. Having considered the rival contentions, I hold that the Commissioner (Appeals) is in error in holding that the date of service on the appellant is 18/4/09 without proof of the same available on record. That the impugned order is vitiated and is against the provisions of law. I accept the date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
