fact issued on
04.04.2017 and has produced a copy of the track
consignment of the relevant post office, which shows that
the notice in this
assessee. The draft order
having been served through speed post, the consignment
tracking clearly reflected the date of delivery/service as
12.03.2016. Hence, the failure
notices are
not replied by the respondent. Ex.P8 is track consignment
with regard to the article being sent. Ex.P9 again
operate his account as per Annexure-F.
The Track consignment letter is also produced
as per Annexure-G for having served the same
learned counsel for the
respondent would contend that the postal track
consignment report clearly establishes that notice was
served on 13.09.2014 itself. Looking to these
further revealed that, one Hruthikraj was ordered the said
consignment track from Delhi for selling the same in
Bengaluru and Mangaluru through one Mohd. Sofiyan ... urging several contentions, learned
counsel for the petitioner primarily contented that, the
consignment from the Post Office was seized on
30.10.2025 at about
cheque, bank endorsement, copy
of the legal notice, postal receipts, postal track
consignment record and RTC extracts.
7. Detail cross examination
having accepted the notice, but no
reply was given and track consignment was also marked
as Ex.P5 in this regard. When there
postal receipt. Ex.P9 is the postal track consignment
according to which, the item i.e., the legal notice issued is
delivered
legal notice to accused,
Ex.P4 is the postal track consignment to contend that
notice was served on the accused
