9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 477X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant latest by 04.08.2012. Therefore, learned Commissioner (Appeals) treated and considered the starting point of limitation from 04.08.2012. The aforesaid finding cannot be sustained for the simple reason that the starting point of limitation is considered merely on presumption and assumption. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has considered the date of dispatched of the OIO but has not considered in fact on which date the appellant received the copy of OIO. If according to department OIO was sent through RPAD, in that case, department must have received acknowledgment receipt with the signature and seal of the company. The Commissioner (Appeals) could have and ought to have called for the acknowledgment receipt of the RPAD to a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 09.2013 in OIA No. RJTExcus 000APP3711314, by which, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) refused to condone the delay, the original appellant has preferred present Appeal. 2.0. That feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with OIA dated 24.07.2012, the appellant herein preferred appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on 23.11.2012. According to the appellant, they received the copy of OIO on 27.08.2012. Still there was some delay and therefore, along with appeal, appellant submitted application requesting to condone the delay. However, Commissioner (Appeals) did not accept the case on behalf of the appellant that they received OIO on 27.08.2012 and by drawing presumption that as OIO was dispatched on 25.07.2012, it is to be presumed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r (Appeals) has observed that as the OIO was dispatched by Department and sent through RPAD on 25.07.2012 and therefore, considering the period of maximum 10 days as reasonable period for reaching OIO from the date of dispatch from the postal department to the factory of the appellant, the OIO ought to have been reached the appellant latest by 04.08.2012. Therefore, learned Commissioner (Appeals) treated and considered the starting point of limitation from 04.08.2012. The aforesaid finding cannot be sustained for the simple reason that the starting point of limitation is considered merely on presumption and assumption. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has considered the date of dispatched of the OIO but has not considered in fact on which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained and the matter is required to be remanded to the learned Commissioner (Appeals) to pass appropriate order on the aspect of condonation of delay afresh and in light of the observations made herein above. It will be open for the learned Commissioner (Appeals) to call for the necessary particulars from the department with respect to exact date of receipt of OIO by the appellant either from acknowledgment receipt of RPAD and / or from any other documents such as inward register etc. 4.0. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the impugned order dated 30.09.2014 passed by the learned Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal passed in Appeal No. 11775 as well as order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
