9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 635X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent. [Order]. This application for condonation of delay has been filed by the applicant. The date of issue of order in appeal is 20-6-2005 but the applicant submits that the same was received by them only on 13-6-2008. 2. Ld. Advocate on behalf of the appellants submits that applicant had preferred the appeal against the order of the Original Adjudicating Authority dated 13-1-200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvocate also drew my attention to their letter dated 1-8-2004 vide which they had intimated that the factory was closed. Ld. DR appearing for the Revenue submits that appellant s contention that the copy was not served is not correct. He drew my attention to the letter to the Superintendent dated 2-8-2007 intimating them that the order had been served on 29-7-2005 itself. Ld. Advocate pointed out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order to be served by registered post and only when that option fails, the second option is to be exercised. 4. I find that the department had not been able to show clearly that the procedure required under Section 37C has been followed and there is failure on the part of the appellant to file the appeal in time. The fact that appellant have filed appeal in time before Commissioner (Appeals) on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
