1997 (8) TMI 248

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Member (J)]. - The appellants filed this appeal against the order dated 27-10-1995 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. In the impugned order, the appeal filed by the appellants is dismissed as time barred. 2. Shri P.S. Bedi, Consultant, appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the copy of the enforcement order was nerver served upo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... since the enforcement order was sent to the appellants through the Registered Post, AD, on 12-5-1995, therefore, the appeal filed by the appellants is time barred. But we find that during the pendency of the appeal, the appraising group, Bombay, informed the Commissioner of Customs, Bombay, that from the official record it could not be verified that the AD card has been received from postal autho .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt order was served upon the appellants. In view of the above discussion and respectfully following the ratio of the above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner of Cusotms (Appeals), Bombay, for deciding the appeal on merits after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants, in accordance with law. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X