https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785824 Condonation of delay under service tax appellate procedure requires a substantiated sufficient cause showing diligence and absence of negligence. A 932-day delay was unsupported because the applicant did not state when the impugned order was received, quantify any medical incapacity, or explain prolonged inaction. Reliance on ignorance of the limitation period and professional representatives was insufficient, particularly where an authorised representative or chartered accountant was responsible for legal steps. Liberal interpretation of sufficient cause did not apply on these facts, while the principle against permitting lethargy or misuse of process supported rejection. The condonation application and appeal were dismissed. en-us Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Feb 2026 08:20:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785824 Condonation of delay under service tax appellate procedure requires a substantiated sufficient cause showing diligence and absence of negligence. A 932-day delay was unsupported because the applicant did not state when the impugned order was received, quantify any medical incapacity, or explain prolonged inaction. Reliance on ignorance of the limitation period and professional representatives was insufficient, particularly where an authorised representative or chartered accountant was responsible for legal steps. Liberal interpretation of sufficient cause did not apply on these facts, while the principle against permitting lethargy or misuse of process supported rejection. The condonation application and appeal were dismissed. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785824