https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114271 Delay in filing the appeal was condoned because the Tribunal accepted that the order in original was first received on 16 September 2002, the department did not rebut that claim despite proof of speed-post dispatch, and the stated reasons for the ten-day delay, including serious illness of the company director and closure of the unit, were treated as sufficient cause. The stay application was not decided on merits; it was adjourned so the departmental representative could produce the case records and verify whether notice of personal hearing had been served on the assessee. en-us Thu, 26 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 May 2012 12:54:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114271 Delay in filing the appeal was condoned because the Tribunal accepted that the order in original was first received on 16 September 2002, the department did not rebut that claim despite proof of speed-post dispatch, and the stated reasons for the ten-day delay, including serious illness of the company director and closure of the unit, were treated as sufficient cause. The stay application was not decided on merits; it was adjourned so the departmental representative could produce the case records and verify whether notice of personal hearing had been served on the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 26 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114271