9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 747X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Postmaster, Tirunelveli that the Adjudication Order was delivered on 5.4.2011 in the address as mentioned in the adjudication order, and therefore, the appeal filed on 13.1.2012 before Commissioner (Appeals) is time-barred. No reason to interfere with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) - Decided against assessee. - ST/S/40894/2013 & ST/41236/2013 - Final Order No. 40562/2014 - Dated: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t they have not received the adjudication order. She fairly submits that during the relevant period their administrative office was shifted and started functioning at Cochin. On a query from the Bench, the learned counsel submits that the shifting of administrative office was not intimated to the Department. The learned counsel submits that there is a letter from the house owner stating that they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot be accepted. She submits that the Department has not placed any proof at all by the postal authorities that the order was served on the addressee. 4. On the other hand, as per the direction of the Bench, the learned AR placed the dispatch register for postal dak issued by the postmaster, Perumal Puram. The learned AR submits that as per postal receipt, the order was served to the addressee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the manner provided in clause (a), by affixing it on the notice board of the customs house. We find that in the present case, it is an undisputed fact that the appellant had shifted their office and had not intimated the same to Department about the change of the office. It is evident from the letter dated 21.10.2013 of the Postmaster, Tirunelveli that the Adjudication Order was delivered on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
