https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170433 The Tribunal dismissed the applications seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals, emphasizing the distinction between void and irregular orders. It held that lack of jurisdiction renders an order void ab initio, and the Commissioner (Appeals) had jurisdiction under the Customs Act. As the impugned orders were within jurisdiction and not void, the delay in filing appeals was not condoned. The Tribunal highlighted the necessity of challenging void orders within the prescribed limitation period to effectively seek relief from the Court. en-us Fri, 01 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 May 2015 16:23:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170433 The Tribunal dismissed the applications seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals, emphasizing the distinction between void and irregular orders. It held that lack of jurisdiction renders an order void ab initio, and the Commissioner (Appeals) had jurisdiction under the Customs Act. As the impugned orders were within jurisdiction and not void, the delay in filing appeals was not condoned. The Tribunal highlighted the necessity of challenging void orders within the prescribed limitation period to effectively seek relief from the Court. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 01 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170433