https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341288 CESTAT Mumbai refused to condone delay in filing the revenue appeals because the applications lacked a cogent explanation. The stated grounds of non-traceability of the file and delayed inputs from the assessing group showed that the Committee of Commissioners had not properly applied its mind before authorising the appeals. The tribunal held that review jurisdiction requires full consideration of the circumstances, including the delay, and that revenue must provide adequate justification before seeking appellate redress. As no satisfactory basis for condonation was shown, the delay was not condoned and the revenue appeals were not entertained. en-us Tue, 18 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Apr 2017 07:29:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341288 CESTAT Mumbai refused to condone delay in filing the revenue appeals because the applications lacked a cogent explanation. The stated grounds of non-traceability of the file and delayed inputs from the assessing group showed that the Committee of Commissioners had not properly applied its mind before authorising the appeals. The tribunal held that review jurisdiction requires full consideration of the circumstances, including the delay, and that revenue must provide adequate justification before seeking appellate redress. As no satisfactory basis for condonation was shown, the delay was not condoned and the revenue appeals were not entertained. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 18 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341288