9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 515X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... la and Gutka (Pan Masala containing Tobacco), which is dutiable under the compounded levy scheme as applicable till 30.06.2017 (from 1st July, GST was implemented). The appellant has closed down their three manufacturing units (in June 2017) located in different premises which are as follows:- (i) Unit No. 4 Plot No. 49A, Rama Road, West Delhi, Delhi. (ii) Unit No. 8 Plot No. 13, Rama Road Industrial Area, West Delhi, Delhi. (iii) Unit No. 9 Plot No. 62, Rama Road Industrial Area, West Delhi, Delhi. 3. Vide letter dated 22.06.2017, the appellant has requested for sealing of all the three units and pursuant to the said request the Department have sealed all the three units on 26.06.2017. Thereafter, the appellant also surre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... days from the date of despatch of the order-in-original by post and the stated date of communication, which is 29.04.2019, and further there is a gap of 505 days from the date of the order, and the date of filing of the appeal. 6. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) called for report from the Adjudicating Authority who in his report informed that the order-in-original dated 29.04.2019 was sent to the appellant by speed post No. ED757377345 IN, and the same was not received back undelivered. The ld. Commissioner further recorded - as per the Department the order-in-original was sent by speed post, which was received by the speed post booking centre on 06.05.2019. A copy of the speed post receipt had also been annexed. Further, the Department ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -section (1)(a) of Section 37C, Revenue has not produced the proof of delivery. Admittedly, Department have not tendered the order in person. Further, admittedly there is no substituted service by way of affixation etc., as provided under clause (b) and (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 37C. Further, it is not a case of demand on the assessee, rather the appellant-assessee was entitled to refund, and admittedly attended the personal hearing in the adjudicating proceedings. There is no incentive for the appellant to sleep over the matter inspite of alleged service of the order-in-original, despatched by speed post on 06.05.2019. It is further pointed out that the address of the appellant-assessee as mentioned in the order-in-original, as wel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the erroneous address as noticed herein above. It is further pointed that the order was despatched by speed post on the erroneous address, and has not been received back undelivered. It is further contended that one of the unit of the appellant company is located at 20, Shivaji Marg, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi. It is further contended that the subsequent despatch on the request of the appellant, of the order-in-original, vide forwarding letter dated 10.07.2020 was also made on the aforementioned erroneous address, which admittedly appellant has received on 28.07.2020. 9. Having considered the rival contentions, we find that admittedly Revenue has despatched the order-in-original on 06.05.2019 at the wrong address. Hence, we hold, there c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
