https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121457 A fresh appeal against the same order was found not maintainable where the Revenue's earlier appeal had already been rejected as filed by an unauthorized officer and had attained finality. Applying its prior decisions, CESTAT held that once an appeal against an impugned order is rejected, no restoration or second appeal against that same order can be entertained. The accompanying application for condonation of delay also failed because the subsequent appeal itself was incompetent. The fresh appeal and condonation application were therefore rejected. en-us Thu, 14 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Jul 2012 17:31:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121457 A fresh appeal against the same order was found not maintainable where the Revenue's earlier appeal had already been rejected as filed by an unauthorized officer and had attained finality. Applying its prior decisions, CESTAT held that once an appeal against an impugned order is rejected, no restoration or second appeal against that same order can be entertained. The accompanying application for condonation of delay also failed because the subsequent appeal itself was incompetent. The fresh appeal and condonation application were therefore rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 14 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121457