9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resaid. Explanation of such delay was offered in paragraph 4 of the application but no reason given as to why the same was not accepted. The learned Tribunal did not say why such explanation was no explanation at all or could not be the explanation for the period between 18.11.2011 and 22.02.2011. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of Revenue. - GA No.3441 of 2014 & CUSTA 3 of 2014 - - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 33 days. In its application for condonation of delay, the Revenue stated the delay had occurred mainly due to misplacement of the file during its movement from one Section to another, which resulted in inadvertent delay. The learned Tribunal by the impugned order, inter alia, held: 2. Revenue filed this appeal for condonation delay of 33 (thirtythree) days. Revenue could not explain the dela ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i) Whether the explanation offered by the Revenue could be rejected by the Tribunal in holding it could not explain the delay without giving reasons for non-acceptance of such explanation or why such explanation was not considered to be a proper explanation? We find the Tribunal had simply said the Revenue could not explain the delay between 18.11.2010 and 22.02.2011. It appears the appeal wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
