Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Appellate Tribunal had jurisdiction under section 12(4) of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 to entertain an appeal filed beyond sixty days from service of the order by condoning the delay, and whether sections 5 and 14 of the Limitation Act could be invoked to save the appeal.
Analysis: Section 12(4) of the Act permits an appeal within forty-five days of service and authorises the Appellate Tribunal to entertain it beyond that period only up to sixty days if sufficient cause is shown. The Court held that this outer limit is mandatory and the Tribunal cannot extend limitation beyond sixty days. Section 14 of the Limitation Act was held inapplicable because the appeal was not prosecuted in another competent forum but before the same authority whose order was challenged. Section 5 of the Limitation Act was also held unavailable because the special statute itself fixed the maximum period within which delay could be condoned. The omission to mention the appellate forum in the impugned order was not treated as a valid ground to enlarge the statutory limit.
Conclusion: The Tribunal had no jurisdiction to condone delay beyond sixty days, and the appeal was not maintainable as time-barred.