2001 (1) TMI 518

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. The appellants herein were clearing air conditioners free of duty from their factory to 100% EOUs against CT-3 Certificates procured by the EOUs in terms of Notification 1/95-C.E., dated 4-1-1995. In the month of June 96, they were informed that the benefit of duty free clearances under CT 3 Certificates could not be availed of by them as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... m for clearances between 21-6-1996 and 24-6-1996 was not admissible. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the letter of protest dated 21-6-1996 bore only the official seal and handwritten date but no signature, and hence was not conclusive evidence of delivery of the letter of protest on 21-6-1996 to the office of the Asstt. Commissioner. Hence this ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is no uniformity in the practice of acknowledgement. The authorities below have only gone by the date of entry in the letter receipt register to hold that the letter was received only on 25-6-1996. However, we agree with the appellants that the date of entry in the receipt register is not to be taken as the date of receipt of the letter. Since the letter clearly shows the date as 21-6-1996, we see .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X