2018 (6) TMI 12 - AT - Service Tax

Period of limitation - Time limitation of filing appeal - whether the appeal filed by the appellant before the first appellate authority is time barred or otherwise? - receipt of the Order-in-Original dated 15.07.2015 served on appellant by a responsible person in doubt - Held that - The records of the departmental authorities do not instil a confidence that the Order-in-Original dated 15.07.2015 was in fact received by responsible person of appellant - the receipt of the Order-in-Original being questioned by the appellant and presumably and there being an element of doubt of the signature on the acknowledgement card, Order-in-Original received by them on 23.11.2015, the appeal filed before the first appellate authority on 14.01.2016 is well within the time limit - impugned order set aside. The matter needs reconsideration by the first appellate authority on merits inasmuch as the first appellate authority has not recorded any findings on the merits of the case - appeal restored.

Summary

Issues involved:
- Appeal time-barred or not

Analysis:
The appeal in question was against an Order-in-Appeal dated 07.10.2016. The main issue revolved around whether the appeal filed by the appellant before the first appellate authority was time-barred. The first appellate authority had dismissed the appeal as time-barred based on a letter from the Commissionerate indicating that the Order-in-Original was served on the appellant via Regd. Post acknowledgment due. The appellant claimed to have received the Order-in-Original on 23.11.2015, contrary to the department's assertion that it was served on 29.07.2015. The first appellate authority concluded that the appellant failed to prove the communication of the impugned order on 23.11.2015. However, the appellant argued that the acknowledgment card was not signed by their staff, and the received date was disputed. They also mentioned receiving the Order-in-Original by email on 23.11.2015 and filing the appeal within the stipulated two months. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the department's records regarding the receipt of the Order-in-Original and deemed the appeal filed on 14.01.2016 to be within the time limit, setting aside the impugned order.

The Tribunal also noted that the first appellate authority did not provide any findings on the merits of the case, which necessitated a reconsideration. Citing the precedent set by the Apex Court in Smithkline Beecham Co., the Tribunal directed the matter to be remitted back to the first appellate authority for a review on merits, emphasizing the importance of following the principles of natural justice in the disposal of the case.