9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 289X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed counsel for the Appellant, the prayer for Early Hearing of the appeal is accepted. Accordingly Early Hearing Application filed by the Appellant is allowed and with the consent of both the sides appeal itself is taken up for hearing and disposal. 3. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant assailing the Order-In-Appeal No.340-ST-ALLD-2024, dated -20/06/2024 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) CGST & Central Excise, Allahabad whereby he has rejected the appeal before him as not maintainable. 4. The facts of the case in brief are that the Order-In-Original dated 24.02.2023 was dispatched through registered post bearing No.RU556894935IN which was returned undelivered with the remark "pata nahi chala atah vapas" and thereafter the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (i) Navakar Agro Industries Ltd. V/s C.C.E. & S.T.-Ahmedabad-III [Final Order No.12551/2023 in Excise Appeal No.13715 of 2014 (Tri-Ahmedabad)] (ii) Vinod Choudhary V/s Union of India [2016 (336) E.L.T. 388 (Raj.) (iii) Hindustan Lever Ltd. V/s Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-IV [2006 (194) E.L.T. 352 (Tri.-Mumbai)] (iv) Ratan Coal Traders V/s Commissioner of C.Ex., Chandigarh [2015 (322) E.L.T. 548 (Tri-Del.) 6. Learned Departmental Representative appearing on behalf of the Revenue has justified the impugned order and prayed that the appeal filed by the Appellant being devoid of any merit be dismissed. 7. Heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. 8. For the sake of ready reference, Section 37C of the Central Ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the manner provided in sub-section (1)." 9. I find that the Order-In-Original dated 24.02.2023 was dispatched by registered post bearing No.RU556894935IN but the same was returned undelivered and this fact has been recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order at Para 4.1.1. Subsequently, a copy of the order was sent through GSTIN registered email on 27.10.2023. However, on request of the Appellant, a photocopy of the impugned order was sent on 05.02.2024. 10. I find that the Tribunal in the case of Ratan Coal Traders V/s Commissioner of C.Ex. Chandigarh (Supra) held that the provision of Section 37C of Central Excise Act, 1944 have to be followed in letter and spirit and accordingly allowed the appeal by way of remand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /speed post if the same is returned back, thereafter only the revenue should paste/ affix the order copy on the factory gate of the appellant. The revenue has admittedly failed to comply with the provision of Clause (a) of Section 37 C (1). Therefore, the service of the order by affixing on the factory gate is absolutely illegal and incorrect and the date of such affixing, cannot be taken as date of service of order. Consequently, the date of receipt of order copy by the appellant from their Dena Bank can only be considered as communication of the order to the appellant. From the date of receipt of order from Dena bank the appellant had filed the appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) well within stipulated time of 60 days. Therefore, there i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
