9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 230X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 7-3-2009 the applicant asked for the status of the appeal. It was informed that the appeal has already been decided and order has already been dispatched. Then the applicant repeatedly asked for copy of the order and same was supplied only by letter dated 15-7-2009. From the order-in-appeal we find that copy of the order was not marked to the Advocate who appeared at the time of personal hearin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of delay of 240 days. 2. The contention of the applicant is that adjudication order was passed on 13-10-2008 but the same was not received by the applicant and applicant vide letter dated 7-3-2009 written to the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) that the order-in-appeal is not received by the assessee nor by his advocate and applicant seeks the status of the appeal. The Superintendent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d hence there is no delay. 3. Revenue submitted that the order-in-appeal was dispatched on 13-10-2008 through speed post and that the same has not been received back. Hence, the presumption is that same has been received by the applicant and, therefore, there is a delay in filing the appeal which is not sufficiently explained. 4. We find that the show cause notice was issued on 16-1-2007 for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion for waiver of duty and penalty. The applicant had already deposited 50% of the duty at the time of hearing before the Commissioner (Appeals). Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount already deposited is sufficient for hearing of appeal. The pre-deposit of the remaining amount of duty and penalty is waived and recovery thereof stayed during the pendency of the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
