https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155272 The Tribunal rejected the Department's preliminary objection, ruling that there was no delay in filing the appeal regarding a duty demand dispute spanning from 1995-96 to 1998-99. The appellant's argument regarding the weight of the order sent in 2006, which raised doubts about its timely receipt, was deemed meritorious. The Tribunal found discrepancies in addresses used for communication and gave the appellant the benefit of the doubt, disposing of the miscellaneous applications accordingly. en-us Wed, 08 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Sep 2013 17:57:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155272 The Tribunal rejected the Department's preliminary objection, ruling that there was no delay in filing the appeal regarding a duty demand dispute spanning from 1995-96 to 1998-99. The appellant's argument regarding the weight of the order sent in 2006, which raised doubts about its timely receipt, was deemed meritorious. The Tribunal found discrepancies in addresses used for communication and gave the appellant the benefit of the doubt, disposing of the miscellaneous applications accordingly. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 08 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155272