https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42425 The appeal, previously a revision application, was found to be time-barred as the Court determined the filing period commenced upon communication of the order, not upon quantification of duty. The request for condonation of the 104-day delay was denied due to insufficient evidence of seeking competent legal advice or exercising due care in following advice received. The Court emphasized the necessity of demonstrating specific and valid reasons for condonation of delay in legal proceedings, ultimately dismissing the application for admission of additional evidence along with the appeal. en-us Wed, 07 Dec 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Jul 2014 12:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42425 The appeal, previously a revision application, was found to be time-barred as the Court determined the filing period commenced upon communication of the order, not upon quantification of duty. The request for condonation of the 104-day delay was denied due to insufficient evidence of seeking competent legal advice or exercising due care in following advice received. The Court emphasized the necessity of demonstrating specific and valid reasons for condonation of delay in legal proceedings, ultimately dismissing the application for admission of additional evidence along with the appeal. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 07 Dec 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42425