9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 335X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rough Speed Post is not a proper service. Therefore, it is presumed that the Order-in-Original was not served on the appellants. When the Order-in-Original was not served on the appellants and they came to know about the passing of the Order-in-Original after getting recovery notice and applied for supply of Order-in-Original and immediately on receiving the Order-in-Original they filed appeal wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l. Commr.(AR) PER : Ashok Jindal The appellants are in appeal alongwith application for stay against the impugned order wherein the appeal has been dismissed on the ground of limitation. 2. Heard both sides. It is the contention of the ld. counsel for the appellants that the Order-in-Original was passed on 20.1.2009 and the same was issued on 4.3.2009 through Speed Post. But they did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impugned order dismissing the appeal treating as time barred is to be set aside. He further submitted that the Order-in-Original is an ex-parte order where they were not heard by the adjudicating authority. Therefore, the matter be remanded back to the original adjudicating authority for fresh consideration. 3. Heard the Ld. counsel. Considered the submissions. We are of the view that the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he adjudication order itself is an ex-parte one. Therefore, it could be proper in the interest of justice to remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority to consider the contention of the appellants on merits. Therefore, we allow the appeal by way of remand to the adjudicating authority with a direction to the appellants to appear before the adjudicating authority within 30 days to fix ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
