https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46292 An unexplained delay of 839 days was not condoned because the file chronology showed long periods of inactivity, the supplementary affidavit gave materially different dates, and the explanation was treated as casual and unsatisfactory. On the merits, the appeal was dismissed as devoid of substance because the Tribunal had relied on decisions already approved by the SC, so the legal position adopted below was sustained. en-us Tue, 04 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Jul 2010 10:39:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46292 An unexplained delay of 839 days was not condoned because the file chronology showed long periods of inactivity, the supplementary affidavit gave materially different dates, and the explanation was treated as casual and unsatisfactory. On the merits, the appeal was dismissed as devoid of substance because the Tribunal had relied on decisions already approved by the SC, so the legal position adopted below was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 04 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46292