9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leged to have been served on them on 30.01.2017 but there is no proof of the said service - Further, even the adjudication order was passed without giving sufficient opportunity to the appellant to put up their defence. Matter remanded to the Commissioner (A) to decide the appeal on merits - appeal allowed by way of remand. - ST/20350/2018-SM - Final Order No. 20046/2019 - Dated:- 11-1-2019 - MR. S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER S. RAGHU, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT Mr. M. SHARAN, ASST. COMMISSIONER, AR FOR THE RESPONDENT ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 15.12.2017 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeal of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeal on time barred. Hence, this appeal. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. 4. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the facts and the law. He further submitted that the submissions of the appellant were not at all considered by the Commissioner (A) and proposed to decide the issue solely on the ground of delay which is in gross valuations of the principles of natural justice. He further submitted that the Commissioner (A) has observed that the appellant has stated the date of receipt of the Order-in-Original as 27.01.2017 in their ST-4 and from there he has count ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a short span of 27 days was given and immediately thereafter the adjudication order was passed. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. AR defended the impugned order and submitted that the appeal before the Commissioner was filed beyond prescribed period and therefore the Commissioner (A) has rightly dismissed the appeal on time barred. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that in the impugned order, the Ld. Commissioner (A) has not considered at all the submissions made by the appellant in their application seeking Condonation of Delay in filing the appeal before him. Further, I find that the appellant has specifically stated in the application that they did not receive the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
