https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91632 The CESTAT upheld the dismissal of the appeal due to delay exceeding the prescribed limitation period. The appellant sought condonation of delay beyond four months, citing poor business conditions and inability to deposit the pre-deposit amount as reasons. The Commissioner (Appeal) correctly held that the appeal was filed beyond the two-month period allowed by law and that only one month's delay could be condoned for sufficient cause. The Tribunal affirmed that the Commissioner (Appeal) lacked jurisdiction to condone delay beyond thirty days and found no merit in the appellant's grounds. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for being time-barred. en-us Mon, 18 Aug 2025 08:39:24 +0530 Mon, 18 Aug 2025 08:39:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91632 The CESTAT upheld the dismissal of the appeal due to delay exceeding the prescribed limitation period. The appellant sought condonation of delay beyond four months, citing poor business conditions and inability to deposit the pre-deposit amount as reasons. The Commissioner (Appeal) correctly held that the appeal was filed beyond the two-month period allowed by law and that only one month's delay could be condoned for sufficient cause. The Tribunal affirmed that the Commissioner (Appeal) lacked jurisdiction to condone delay beyond thirty days and found no merit in the appellant's grounds. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for being time-barred. Highlights Service Tax Mon, 18 Aug 2025 08:39:24 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91632