https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166787 A credible explanation showing that the Department had dispatched the appeals in time but the papers were lost in transit constituted sufficient cause for delay, so the appeals were admitted. On classification, conveyor belting was treated as falling under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff rather than Item 22(3), following the determination in the connected matter involving the same manufacturer, product and issue. The assessee's classification was therefore upheld and the departmental challenge failed on both limitation and merits. en-us Thu, 24 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Nov 2014 09:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166787 A credible explanation showing that the Department had dispatched the appeals in time but the papers were lost in transit constituted sufficient cause for delay, so the appeals were admitted. On classification, conveyor belting was treated as falling under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff rather than Item 22(3), following the determination in the connected matter involving the same manufacturer, product and issue. The assessee's classification was therefore upheld and the departmental challenge failed on both limitation and merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 24 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166787