2025-VIL-01-CESTAT-DEL-ST

SERVICE TAX CESTAT Cases

Service Tax - Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Service of Order, Proof of Delivery, Limitation – Dismissal of appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground of limitation holding that the appeal was beyond the permissible condonable time limit of one month - Whether sending of the order by speed-post complies with the provision of Section 37C(1)(a) of the CEA, 1944, i.e. whether proof of dispatch can supplement the proof of service thereof – HELD - as per the amended section 37C(1)(a) of the CEA, 1944, in case of service by speed post, proof of delivery is mandatory. In the present case, there was no proof of delivery of the Order-in-Original sent by speed post to the appellant - Mere proof of dispatch is not sufficient and proof of delivery is essential for service of orders/notices sent by speed post - in the absence of proof of delivery, the service of the Order-in-Original cannot be said to be valid as per the statutory requirements - the Commissioner (Appeals) had dismissed the appeal solely on the technical ground of limitation without considering the explanation for the delay or providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant - no opportunity of personal hearing was given to the appellant nor any reasonable time to file the miscellaneous application. The very basic principle of principles of natural justice has been violated by Commissioner (Appeals) - the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal on merits after giving the appellant a proper opportunity of being heard – the appeal is allowed by remand

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page