TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 1023
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R) - for the Respondent. ORDER The appeal is against order dated 09/10/2013 of Commissioner (Appeals - I), Jaipur. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant on the ground of delay in filing appeal, beyond the time limit prescribed under Section 85 of Finance Act, 1994. The order-in-original dated 30/11/2010 was issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the order should have been sent by a registered post with acknowledgement due. Proof of delivery is necessary to satisfy the provision of law. They have filed a sworn affidavit stating that they have never received the original order before 18/05/2012. As such, there is no delay in filing the appeal and the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in rejecting their appeal as time barred. Reliance was placed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erused the appeal records. I note that the Tribunal has, on more than one occasion, directed the Revenue to file an affidavit specifically regarding compliance of the provision of Section 37C (1) (a) in the present case and also indicating the proof of delivery of the original order to the appellant. Unfortunately, despite of repeated instructions, such affidavits has not been filed. It is not inc....