https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252170 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to the lack of adequacy in the appellant's explanation for the delay in filing the appeal, despite citing the illness of the authorized representative as the reason. The Tribunal highlighted that the company had other Directors who could have filed the appeal and noted that the representative had participated in personal hearings during the period in question. Emphasizing the importance of the sufficiency of the explanation, the Tribunal rejected the application for condonation of delay, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal against Order-in-Original No. 57/2012/C. en-us Mon, 19 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Oct 2014 18:05:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252170 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to the lack of adequacy in the appellant's explanation for the delay in filing the appeal, despite citing the illness of the authorized representative as the reason. The Tribunal highlighted that the company had other Directors who could have filed the appeal and noted that the representative had participated in personal hearings during the period in question. Emphasizing the importance of the sufficiency of the explanation, the Tribunal rejected the application for condonation of delay, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal against Order-in-Original No. 57/2012/C. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 19 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252170