https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89433 The appeals were admitted without delay condonation as the issue was brief. The delay in filing the appeals was not established. The refund claims, although initially filed with the Range Supdt., were returned and not refiled with the Assistant Collector within the specified time limit, rendering them time-barred under Section 11B. The absence of the Excise Clerk was not substantiated, leading to the rejection of all five appeals by the Tribunal. en-us Tue, 10 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 10:42:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89433 The appeals were admitted without delay condonation as the issue was brief. The delay in filing the appeals was not established. The refund claims, although initially filed with the Range Supdt., were returned and not refiled with the Assistant Collector within the specified time limit, rendering them time-barred under Section 11B. The absence of the Excise Clerk was not substantiated, leading to the rejection of all five appeals by the Tribunal. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 10 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89433