9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... None Present for the Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Authorized Representative ORDER The present appeal is filed to assail the Order-in-Appeal No. 308/2019 dated 28.03.2019 vide which the appeal against the Order-in-Original No. 44/2015 dated 23.02.2015 has been dismissed holding the appeal to be time-barred in terms of proviso to (3A) of Section 85 of Finance Act, 1994. Hence the appeal has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l before him as time-barred. Learned Departmental Representative reiterated the finding of impugned order. Relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur [2008 (221) ELT 163 (SC)] has prayed for the dismissal of the present appeal. 4. Having heard the department perusing the entire record of the appeal including t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax Division-G, Bikaner was requested to verify the date of delivery of the OI0, in reply of which he has submitted vide his letter C. No. IV(ST)722/SKR/2013/1089 dated 28.02.2019 that OI0 No.44/2015-ST(Dem.) dated 23.02.2015 was dispatched to Sh. Ram Kishan Delu, Ward No.1, Jail Road, Nokha, Distt.- Bikaner on 25.02.2015 through registered pos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterprises (supra) has already held that the Commissioner (Appeals) has the power to condone the delay only up to 30 days after the expiry of 60 days from the date of receipt of the order in original. In the present case, the order in original dated 23.02.2015 was duly dispatched by the department to the appellant on the date of order itself and the same address on which the show cause notice was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
