https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117691 The tribunal dismissed the appeal and stay application as time-barred due to the party's failure to provide a satisfactory explanation for the 57-day delay in filing the appeal. The lack of evidence of authorization for a consultant to file the appeal or proof of his inability to do so resulted in the rejection of the condonation of delay application. This decision emphasizes the necessity of justifying delays in appeals with clear and verifiable reasons to avoid adverse outcomes. en-us Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Jun 2012 18:17:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117691 The tribunal dismissed the appeal and stay application as time-barred due to the party's failure to provide a satisfactory explanation for the 57-day delay in filing the appeal. The lack of evidence of authorization for a consultant to file the appeal or proof of his inability to do so resulted in the rejection of the condonation of delay application. This decision emphasizes the necessity of justifying delays in appeals with clear and verifiable reasons to avoid adverse outcomes. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117691