TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1783X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scribed in statute, the same should not be construed as proper communication and in absence of proper substantiation by Revenue regarding the date of receipt of the impugned order as claimed by the applicant, should be considered as the appropriate date for the purpose of computation of the limitation period - thus, the interest of justice demands that 11-11-2016 should be considered as the date of communication of the impugned order and since the appeal was filed before the Tribunal on 7-2-2017, the same is within the stipulated time as prescribed in Section 35B ibid. There is no delay in filing appeal - Registry is directed to accept the appeal papers and assign the appeal number to the appeal filed by the applicant - appeal restored. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the order-in-appeal dated 14-11-2007 was forwarded by the Department on 11-11-2016 and considering such date as the date of receipt of the order-in-appeal, the present appeal was filed within the stipulated time limit. He further submitted that the order has not been communicated in the manner prescribed under Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and thus, the date of communication of the order on 11-11-2016 should be construed as the date of receipt of such order. In this context, the Ld. Advocate has relied on the judgment of Hon ble High Courts delivered in the cases of Amidev Agro Care Pvt. Ltd. - 2012 (279) E.L.T. 353 (Bombay) Premier Garment Processing - 2015 (39) S.T.R. 812 (Mad.), and CCE v. Best Dyeing - 2011 (271) E.L. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by speed post is not the one contemplated by Section 35C of the Act, which requires communication of the order by registered post with acknowledgement due . Thus, in view of the settled position of law, since the impugned order has not been communicated in the manner prescribed in statute, the same should not be construed as proper communication and in absence of proper substantiation by Revenue regarding the date of receipt of the impugned order as claimed by the applicant, should be considered as the appropriate date for the purpose of computation of the limitation period. Further, we also find that even if the impugned order was sent by the office of the Commissioner (Appeals) through speed post, but there is no acknowledgement due or a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
