2015 (11) TMI 1418

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r the Respondent : Mr K P Muralidharan, AC (AR) ORDER Per D. N. Panda Appellant has come with a delay of 291 days to Tribunal on the ground that the Order-in-Original dated 30.8.2012 although was served on the appellant on 23.11.2012, it was prevented to appeal by 22.2.2013 for the reason that the impugned order was received by its employee and that escaped notice of the appellant. From 1.2.201 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion of delay nor his contact address has been furnished therein. The application filed is without any affidavit. 4. The medical certificate when discloses that the appellant was under treatment from 1.2.2013 that does not reveal after 23.11.2012 whether the appellant had any knowledge before his treatment started. It is also curious to notice that 21 days before expiry of the period of filing of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntly the plea of leaving of an employee soon after an impugned order is received by a litigant and sudden discovery thereof after some time to seek delay condonation. 6. It is surprising that when the appellant faced a service tax demand of nearly rupees six crores, why he remained silent without seeking appeal remedy. The delay caused has caused extreme hardship to Revenue to realize its dues. I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X