SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Raj) 943

GOVIND MATHUR, VINEET KOTHARI
Vinod Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Dr. A.A. Bhansali, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Jagat Tatia, Advocate.

ORDER :

This appeal was admitted on 8-3-2016 to examine the following substantial question of law :-

“Whether the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal under the order dated 17-6-2015 is justified in accepting that the order dated 21-12-2010 was adequately served upon the appellant though no evidence was adduced as to whether the post was ever tendered or affixed in the manner provided under sub-section (1) of Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944?”

2. The submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that no material was available with the respondent No. 2 to arrive at the conclusion that the notice issued was ever served upon the appellant.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that as per Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 every decision or order passed or any summons or notices issued under this Act or the rules made there under, shall be deemed to have been served on the date on which the decision, order, summons or notice is tendered or delivered by post or a copy thereof is affixed in the manner provided in sub-section (1) of Section 37C.

4. As per learned counsel in view of the fact that the notice was sent by post, it






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top