https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208890 Where the record did not show prior service of the appellate order, the limitation period was to be computed from the date of receipt, and the appeal was found to have been filed within time except for a minimal delay of 10 days. The court accepted the explanation that closure of the mills delayed collection of materials for the appeal, and held that such delay could not be treated as inordinate. The rejection of the appeal and stay petition on delay grounds was therefore unsustainable, and the matter was directed to be entertained and decided according to law. en-us Fri, 20 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Feb 2012 07:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208890 Where the record did not show prior service of the appellate order, the limitation period was to be computed from the date of receipt, and the appeal was found to have been filed within time except for a minimal delay of 10 days. The court accepted the explanation that closure of the mills delayed collection of materials for the appeal, and held that such delay could not be treated as inordinate. The rejection of the appeal and stay petition on delay grounds was therefore unsustainable, and the matter was directed to be entertained and decided according to law. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 20 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208890