https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97855 Condonation of a three-month delay in filing the appeal was refused because the appellant failed to show due diligence or inability to act within time. The Tribunal noted that the Commissioner's order had been sent to the factory address shown for service, that personal-hearing notices had been received and acted upon, and that the factory remained operational during the relevant period. As no evidence showed that the department was required to serve the order elsewhere, the delay was not excused and the appeal remained barred by limitation. en-us Wed, 16 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Jan 2012 13:16:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97855 Condonation of a three-month delay in filing the appeal was refused because the appellant failed to show due diligence or inability to act within time. The Tribunal noted that the Commissioner's order had been sent to the factory address shown for service, that personal-hearing notices had been received and acted upon, and that the factory remained operational during the relevant period. As no evidence showed that the department was required to serve the order elsewhere, the delay was not excused and the appeal remained barred by limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97855