https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99009 A departmental explanation for a five-month delay in filing an appeal was found inadequate because prompt action was expected once the impugned order was received or refund claims were made. The Tribunal noted that government offices are required to record file movement under the manual of office procedure, yet the explanation did not show what concrete steps were taken to trace the files or why routine office controls did not prevent the delay. On that basis, the Tribunal declined to condone the delay, and the appeal was not admitted for hearing on merits. en-us Thu, 08 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:07:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99009 A departmental explanation for a five-month delay in filing an appeal was found inadequate because prompt action was expected once the impugned order was received or refund claims were made. The Tribunal noted that government offices are required to record file movement under the manual of office procedure, yet the explanation did not show what concrete steps were taken to trace the files or why routine office controls did not prevent the delay. On that basis, the Tribunal declined to condone the delay, and the appeal was not admitted for hearing on merits. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 08 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99009