https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4246 Condonation of a five-day delay in filing an excise appeal was refused because the explanation was vague, unsupported, and did not disclose the exact period of default or any credible cause. On merits, the challenge to the de novo adjudication failed because the appellant did not produce admissible evidence to substantiate export proof and domestic-clearance claims; xerox copies and incomplete papers were insufficient, and no violation of natural justice was shown. The appeal, stay petition, and miscellaneous application were rejected, leaving the duty demand and penalty findings undisturbed. en-us Mon, 07 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4246 Condonation of a five-day delay in filing an excise appeal was refused because the explanation was vague, unsupported, and did not disclose the exact period of default or any credible cause. On merits, the challenge to the de novo adjudication failed because the appellant did not produce admissible evidence to substantiate export proof and domestic-clearance claims; xerox copies and incomplete papers were insufficient, and no violation of natural justice was shown. The appeal, stay petition, and miscellaneous application were rejected, leaving the duty demand and penalty findings undisturbed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 07 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4246