TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 107
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....donation of delay. Miscellaneous application No. ST/MISC/50578 of 2021 is filed by the appellant providing additional grounds for seeking condonation of delay. Miscellaneous application No. ST/EH/50232 of 2021 is filed by the appellant seeking early disposal of the appeal. All these applications have been listed today and we have heard both sides and perused the records. 2. We find that miscellaneous application No. ST/EH/50232 of 2021 seeking out of turn hearing of the appeal cannot be entertained at this stage as there was a delay in filing the appeal and until a decision is taken with respect to the delay the appeal cannot be heard. Therefore, the application No. ST/EH/50232 of 2021 is dismissed as pre-mature. 3. Both application No. 5....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ii) The impugned order cannot be termed to have been served as per Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 ; (iii) The appellant came to know about the impugned order when he received an E-mail dated 21.07.2015 from the Range Superintendent asking it to pay the amounts confirmed by the impugned order. The appellant, through its Chartered Accountant Mr. Rohit Vaswani requested the Range Superintendent vide letter dated 22.07.2015 for a copy of the impugned order. Response to the letter was received from the Divisional Assistant Commissioner vide letter dated 04.08.2015 in which he advised the appellant to contact the Superintendent (Adjudication), Central Excise, Delhi I of the order. (iv) The Authorized Representative of the appella....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....letter dated 17.02.2016. Meanwhile, a letter for recovery of the dues was issued by the respondent to State Bank of India on 24.07.2019. Thereafter, the Authorized Representative of the appellant received a copy of the impugned order on 27.07.2019. It was therefore, prayed that this order dated 27.07.2019 should be reckoned as date of service of the order and the total delay in this appeal is only 19 days which may be condoned. 4. Learned Departmental Representative has obtained the comments of the Commissionerate who by their letter dated 17.12.2021 explained that the appellant's assertion that the impugned order dated 29.03.2014 has not been served upon it, as it was not sent by registered post is not correct. It is also not correct to s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he passing of the impugned order. Since about 1½ have lapsed, the matter was taken up for adjudication and the impugned order was passed. After the order was passed on 29.03.2014, it was sent by registered post to the appellant as required under Section 153 of the Customs Act. However, it was returned undelivered by the postal authorities with the remarks "left". As per Section 153 of the Customs Act, if any notice or summons or decision or order passed under Act cannot be served by tendering it or by registered post, it can be served by affixing it on the notice board of the office. It was accordingly duly affixed on the notice board. Thus, in terms of Section 153 of the Customs Act relied upon by the applicant's application itself,....