https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326864 A 2,249-day delay in filing appeals against proprietors, partners, brokers and bill issuers was not condoned because the Department gave no satisfactory explanation beyond a belated decision taken on counsel's advice. The earlier appeals against the manufacturers had already been filed in time, and the liability of the other noticees was only consequential to the finding against the manufacturers. Their omission from the later appeals did not undermine the maintainability of the Department's main appeals. No sufficient cause was shown for condonation, and no substantial question of law arose, so the delayed appeals were not entertained. 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 A 2,249-day delay in filing appeals against proprietors, partners, brokers and bill issuers was not condoned because the Department gave no satisfactory explanation beyond a belated decision taken on counsel's advice. The earlier appeals against the manufacturers had already been filed in time, and the liability of the other noticees was only consequential to the finding against the manufacturers. Their omission from the later appeals did not undermine the maintainability of the Department's main appeals. No sufficient cause was shown for condonation, and no substantial question of law arose, so the delayed appeals were not entertained. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326864