https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78209 Delay of 146 days in filing the appeal before CESTAT was treated as condonable because the explanation, though not fully substantial, did not show inordinate delay and the interests of justice favoured hearing the matter on merits. The petitioner also had an arguable case on duty liability, as the re-test report indicated Fe content below the threshold for the concessional rate. The delay was therefore to be condoned subject to payment of costs, enabling the appeal to be considered in accordance with law. en-us Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78209 Delay of 146 days in filing the appeal before CESTAT was treated as condonable because the explanation, though not fully substantial, did not show inordinate delay and the interests of justice favoured hearing the matter on merits. The petitioner also had an arguable case on duty liability, as the re-test report indicated Fe content below the threshold for the concessional rate. The delay was therefore to be condoned subject to payment of costs, enabling the appeal to be considered in accordance with law. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78209