https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51990 The Tribunal refused to condone a 454-day delay in filing an appeal because the impugned order had been received and the appeal was not filed within the statutory three-month period. The appellant's explanation that no separate appeal was required since the principal owner had already appealed was held insufficient, and the cited precedent was distinguished because it concerned a true supplementary appeal filed after a timely main appeal. As no justifiable cause was shown to excuse the delay, the appeal was treated as time-barred and the miscellaneous application for condonation was rejected. en-us Wed, 02 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Sep 2010 16:45:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51990 The Tribunal refused to condone a 454-day delay in filing an appeal because the impugned order had been received and the appeal was not filed within the statutory three-month period. The appellant's explanation that no separate appeal was required since the principal owner had already appealed was held insufficient, and the cited precedent was distinguished because it concerned a true supplementary appeal filed after a timely main appeal. As no justifiable cause was shown to excuse the delay, the appeal was treated as time-barred and the miscellaneous application for condonation was rejected. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 02 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51990