https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273194 The court upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) to dismiss the petitioner's appeal challenging demands made by the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise due to being filed beyond the condonable period. The court emphasized the limitation on condoning delays beyond the prescribed period, citing relevant precedents. The petitioner's plea to invoke Article 226 of the Constitution to condone the delay was rejected, and the court dismissed the writ petition, stating that challenges must be raised before the appropriate forum if alternate remedies are barred by limitation. en-us Thu, 06 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Jun 2018 13:03:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273194 The court upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) to dismiss the petitioner's appeal challenging demands made by the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise due to being filed beyond the condonable period. The court emphasized the limitation on condoning delays beyond the prescribed period, citing relevant precedents. The petitioner's plea to invoke Article 226 of the Constitution to condone the delay was rejected, and the court dismissed the writ petition, stating that challenges must be raised before the appropriate forum if alternate remedies are barred by limitation. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 06 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273194