9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 334X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat be so, there is reasonable presumption that appellant must have received the impugned order. As such he prays that inasmuch as there is huge delay, the appeal could not be maintained. - Held that:- High Court in the case of Amidev Agro Care Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India reported in [2012 (6) TMI 304 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] has held that sending of order by speed post is not sufficient compliance t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndoned. - Condonation Application No. 5140 of 2012, Central Excise Appeal No.4040 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 14-7-2014 - Archana Wadhwa And R. K. Singh,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri R. M. Saxena For the Respondent : Shri M S Negi, AR. ORDER Per: Archana Wadhwa: The application is for condoning the delay of 387 days in filing of the present appeal. The appellant's contentio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sent by registered A.D and in the present case, the impugned order of Commissioner was not sent by registered A.D. He also fairly concedes that Revenue does not have any proof of any evidence on record to show that speed post sent by them was actually received by the appellant. However, he submits that the said impugned order was also sent to the Manager of the appellant company and he is not disp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved the same. Ld. Advocate clarifies that Commissioner has set aside the penalties against the Manager and as such the Manager was not required to file any appeal, in which case, the date of receipt of the order by the Manager becomes irrelevant. 5. After considering submissions made by both the sides, we find that the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Amidev Agro Care Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
