9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1623X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osal was confirmed vide the Order-in-Original No. 73 dated 31.05.2017. Being aggrieved thereof, an Appeal was preferred vide Order-in-Appeal No. 195-18-19 dated 29.06.2018 that the same was dismissed as being barred by limitation. Being aggrieved, the Appeal is before this Tribunal. 2. I have heard Ms. Priyanka Goel, Ld. Advocate for the appellant and Ms. Tamana Alam, Ld. DR for the Department. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the Order-in-Original dated 31.05.2017 was never received by the appellant till a letter dated 07.02.2018 was given to the Department asking for the copy of the Order-in-Original. Thus, the copy of the Order was received by the appellant on 08.02.2018 alongwith the letter of the Department. It is t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e matter is prayed to be set aside with the request of remanding back the same for being considered on merits. 4. While rebutting these arguments, it is submitted on behalf of the Department that the address on which the Order-in-Original was served was the same address as was mentioned in the SCN except with a typographical error of putting a slash and the same being substituted by numeral one. Admittedly, the appellant had received not only the SCNs but three of the letters calling it upon for the personal hearing despite neither the reply to the SCN was filed nor ever the appellant appeared for making defence submissions before the authorities below. Thus, it was the deliberate ignorance on the part of the appellant to not to get the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sonal hearing. This in itself indicates that they don't have any defence that can be put forth against the action. In absence of any defence from the side of notice the allegations leveled in SCN are naturally liable to be confirmed. Moreover, the figures of service tax liability shown in SCN are worked out on the basis of records maintained, recovered from Noticee No. 1 premises and accepted by Noticee No. 2 in the statement recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, hence not at all disputable." 6. Coming to the order under challenge, I observe that the submission as taken by the appellant before this Tribunal today was taken before Commissioner(Appeals) as well, who has appreciated the pointed out defect in the address a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is mentioned in the said letter. Rather the letter is specifically mentioning the details of the Order-in-Original. There is nothing on record as to when and how the appellant acquired those details which again is sufficient to hold that the Order-in-Original was very much in the knowledge and notice of the appellant. It is due to the earlier noticed dilatory tactics and the negligent attitude of the appellant that the same was not pursued in time. 8. Law of limitation intends to fix a time limit to a 'lis' which has to be mandatorily followed. Though there has been a catena of judgments that the merits of the case have always to be preferred instead of dismissing the 'lis' merely on technical grounds but those decisions are ample clear t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
