<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (4) TMI 1853 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790784</link>
    <description>Condonation of 276 days&#039; delay was refused because the explanation offered was found wholly insufficient. As a result, the civil appeal was held to be time barred and dismissed. The operative point is that delay will not be excused where the cause shown does not satisfactorily account for the full period of default.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2026 07:19:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899196" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 1853 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790784</link>
      <description>Condonation of 276 days&#039; delay was refused because the explanation offered was found wholly insufficient. As a result, the civil appeal was held to be time barred and dismissed. The operative point is that delay will not be excused where the cause shown does not satisfactorily account for the full period of default.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790784</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>