9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 614X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 23/05 : This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 11th September, 2003 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in A. No. C/571/2002-NB(S) [2003 (158) E.L.T. 441 (Tribunal)]. 2. Along with the appeal the appellant has filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The applicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis, that the appellant ought to have known of the passing of the order on 8th June, 2004 (date of the receipt of the application) and not on 23rd July, 2004. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent informs us that the amount has already been refunded sometime in 2004 itself while the present appeal has been filed, as mentioned above, in May, 2005. 5. In para 4 of the application, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was sent to the appellant Ashok Kumar by Registered letter No. 843 on 25-9-2003 and to CC, New Delhi (Respondent) vide Regd. letter No. 1096 on 29-9-2003. A photocopy of the relevant pages of the dispatch register are annexed to the letter. This being the position, the presumption is that the certified copy of the order which was dispatched in the registered letter would have been received by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we are of the view that the appellant has not come with the correct facts before us and has also not explained the delay of about one and a half years in filing the appeal. 11. In any case as noticed above, the claim was refunded to the respondent. We do not find any merit in the application for condonation of delay and the same is dismissed. 12. Since we have declined to condone the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
