https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380032 Refusal to condone an inordinate filing delay did not give rise to a substantial question of law under Section 35G where the Tribunal had rejected the explanation as insufficient on facts. The challenge was to a discretionary factual finding, so the delay issue could not be reopened in further appeal. Separately, dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance with a subsisting pre-deposit condition could not be interfered with because the waiver order had never been set aside. An appeal filed without satisfying that condition was treated as ineffective in law, and the dismissal followed as a necessary consequence. en-us Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Oct 2020 14:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380032 Refusal to condone an inordinate filing delay did not give rise to a substantial question of law under Section 35G where the Tribunal had rejected the explanation as insufficient on facts. The challenge was to a discretionary factual finding, so the delay issue could not be reopened in further appeal. Separately, dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance with a subsisting pre-deposit condition could not be interfered with because the waiver order had never been set aside. An appeal filed without satisfying that condition was treated as ineffective in law, and the dismissal followed as a necessary consequence. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380032