https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326864 The High Court of Madras upheld the Tribunal's decision to refuse condonation of delay exceeding 2200 days in appeals filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Court clarified that failure to include individuals like proprietors and partners in the initial appeals against manufacturers does not impact the main appeals' outcome. It emphasized that fines imposed on individuals based on manufacturers' guilt can be enforced if the Department succeeds in main appeals. The judgment highlights the enforceability of orders against proprietors and partners, dismissing the appeals due to the absence of substantial legal questions and insufficient justification for the delay. en-us Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Nov 2016 14:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326864 The High Court of Madras upheld the Tribunal's decision to refuse condonation of delay exceeding 2200 days in appeals filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Court clarified that failure to include individuals like proprietors and partners in the initial appeals against manufacturers does not impact the main appeals' outcome. It emphasized that fines imposed on individuals based on manufacturers' guilt can be enforced if the Department succeeds in main appeals. The judgment highlights the enforceability of orders against proprietors and partners, dismissing the appeals due to the absence of substantial legal questions and insufficient justification for the delay. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326864