2014 (12) TMI 747 - AT - Service Tax

Condonation of delay - Delay in receipt of order - Commissioner dismissed appeal as barred by limitation - Held that - Appellant had shifted their office and had not intimated the same to Department about the change of the office. It is evident from the letter dated 21.10.2013 of the Postmaster, Tirunelveli that the Adjudication Order was delivered on 5.4.2011 in the address as mentioned in the adjudication order, and therefore, the appeal filed on 13.1.2012 before Commissioner (Appeals) is time-barred. No reason to interfere with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues: Appeal dismissed as time-barred due to non-receipt of adjudication order.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as time-barred since the adjudication order was passed on 29.3.2011, dispatched on 30.3.2011, and the appeal was filed on 13.1.2012.
2. The appellant contended that they did not receive the adjudication order due to their office relocation, which was not communicated to the Department. The appellant cited precedents where proof of delivery was required for communication of orders.
3. The Department presented the dispatch register and postal receipts showing delivery of the order to the appellant's address. A letter from the Postmaster confirmed the delivery on 5.4.2011.
4. The Customs Act, 1962 specifies the methods of serving orders, decisions, summons, or notices, including registered post delivery or affixing on the customs house notice board.
5. The Tribunal concluded that since the adjudication order was delivered to the address mentioned in the order and the appellant failed to inform about the office relocation, the appeal filed after the time limit was indeed time-barred.
6. Considering the facts and legal provisions, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, dismissing the appeal and disposing of the stay application.

This detailed analysis highlights the key arguments, evidence presented, legal provisions applied, and the ultimate decision of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI regarding the dismissal of the appeal as time-barred due to the non-receipt of the adjudication order by the appellant.