9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 230X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent. ORDER Heard both sides. The applicant filed this application for condonation 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 n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of the order, the applicant filed the appeal within normal period of limitation and 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 sufficien ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y, is condoned. Application for COD is allowed. 5. Applicant filed the application 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
