https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364213 An inordinate delay in filing the Department's appeal was condoned where the lapse arose from a procedural mistake in filing one appeal instead of two against separate Orders-in-Original. The dispute concerned refund claims linked to valuation under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the matter was considered fit for examination by the Division Bench. The proceeding was therefore allowed only to the extent of condoning delay and directing placement of the appeals before the appropriate Bench for further hearing; the substantive refund issue was left open for decision. en-us Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jul 2018 07:45:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364213 An inordinate delay in filing the Department's appeal was condoned where the lapse arose from a procedural mistake in filing one appeal instead of two against separate Orders-in-Original. The dispute concerned refund claims linked to valuation under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the matter was considered fit for examination by the Division Bench. The proceeding was therefore allowed only to the extent of condoning delay and directing placement of the appeals before the appropriate Bench for further hearing; the substantive refund issue was left open for decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364213