https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106286 An 86-day delay in filing the appeal was not condoned because the explanation based on internal reconsideration and higher administrative review was found unacceptable. The Tribunal held that initial acceptance of the Commissioner (Appeals) order, followed by a later view that transit insurance was not the sole criterion to prove supplier ownership and that an appeal should be filed, did not constitute sufficient cause. As a result, the appeal remained time barred and was dismissed without being entertained on merits. en-us Thu, 02 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:34:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106286 An 86-day delay in filing the appeal was not condoned because the explanation based on internal reconsideration and higher administrative review was found unacceptable. The Tribunal held that initial acceptance of the Commissioner (Appeals) order, followed by a later view that transit insurance was not the sole criterion to prove supplier ownership and that an appeal should be filed, did not constitute sufficient cause. As a result, the appeal remained time barred and was dismissed without being entertained on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 02 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106286