https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124547 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision to dismiss the appeal as time-barred due to a significant delay of over five years in filing beyond the limitation period. The appellants failed to provide evidence of registration cancellation in 1997 and did not specify an alternate address for correspondence. Despite the appellant's claim of late receipt of the Order-in-Original in 2005, the Department confirmed delivery in 2000, acknowledged by the appellants. The Tribunal found the appeal ineligible for condonation under the Central Excise Act, resulting in its rejection. en-us Mon, 04 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Oct 2012 16:11:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124547 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision to dismiss the appeal as time-barred due to a significant delay of over five years in filing beyond the limitation period. The appellants failed to provide evidence of registration cancellation in 1997 and did not specify an alternate address for correspondence. Despite the appellant's claim of late receipt of the Order-in-Original in 2005, the Department confirmed delivery in 2000, acknowledged by the appellants. The Tribunal found the appeal ineligible for condonation under the Central Excise Act, resulting in its rejection. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 04 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124547