https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202956 The Tribunal rejected the appeal due to a delay in filing, as the appellant failed to provide evidence to refute the Commissioner's assertion that the order was received earlier than claimed. Signatures on the original appeal and acknowledgment were found to be similar, indicating receipt. The Tribunal upheld the decision, emphasizing the Commissioner's inability to condone delays exceeding one year. The appeal lacked merit as evidence showed the order was not received as claimed. The importance of substantial evidence in supporting claims and the limitation on appeal filing time were highlighted. en-us Fri, 31 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 May 2015 11:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202956 The Tribunal rejected the appeal due to a delay in filing, as the appellant failed to provide evidence to refute the Commissioner's assertion that the order was received earlier than claimed. Signatures on the original appeal and acknowledgment were found to be similar, indicating receipt. The Tribunal upheld the decision, emphasizing the Commissioner's inability to condone delays exceeding one year. The appeal lacked merit as evidence showed the order was not received as claimed. The importance of substantial evidence in supporting claims and the limitation on appeal filing time were highlighted. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 31 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202956