By the Court.—We have heard Sri Ashok Bhatnagar, the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Prateek Chandra, the learned Counsel holding brief of Sri Vinod Kant, the learned counsel for the respondent.

2. It transpires that the appellant’s application for refund was rejected by the authority, who passed the order in original dated 5th June, 2013. This order was served upon an employee of the appellant in the respondent’s office on 26th June, 2013 and was placed before the appellant on 28th June, 2013. The appellant preferred an appeal on 26th August, 2013 under Section 85 of the Finance Act (2), 1994.

3. According to the appellant, the appeal was filed within the stipulated period of two months. This appeal was however, rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals) by its order dated 25th September, 2013 on the ground of limitation. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that there was delay of two days and that the appellant had misrepresented the fact that the order in original was served on 28th June, 2013, whereas it was actually served upon his employee on 26th June, 2013 and on this misrepresentation, the appeal was dismissed as being barred by limitation. The appellant, being a