1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Appeal restored after 20 years due to lack of prejudice, applicant to rectify defect</h1> The Tribunal allowed the restoration of an appeal that was dismissed for default in 1993 after a significant delay of about 20 years. The High Court ... Application for restoration of appeal – Held that:- It is seen that the Hon’ble High Court in the applicant’s case had given observation that the court is of the considered view that no prejudice would be caused to the respondent in the event of restoring the appeal for consideration and disposal on the basis of merits by affording opportunity to the petitioner. - applicant is directed to comply with the defect memo insofar as the correction of the respondent’s name should be Commissioner of Customs, Trichy. - order recalled. Issues: Restoration of appeal dismissed for default after a significant period.In this case, the applicant filed an application for restoration of appeal No. C/107/1989, which was dismissed for default in 1993. The applicant moved a Writ Petition before the High Court, which directed the applicant to file a petition for restoration of the appeal. The High Court observed that no prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the appeal is restored for consideration on merits. The applicant, an individual, appealed against the penalty and confiscation of Indian currency. The Revenue argued that the restoration application filed after about 20 years should not be accepted, citing decisions from the Bombay High Court and Gujarat High Court where restoration was denied due to delay. The Revenue also highlighted the delay in filing the restoration application after the High Court's order.The Tribunal considered the observation of the Madras High Court, which stated that restoring the appeal would not cause prejudice to the respondents. The Tribunal, in line with the High Court's order, decided to restore the appeal to its original number, allowing the restoration application. The Tribunal directed the applicant to comply with a defect memo regarding the correction of the respondent's name to Commissioner of Customs, Trichy. The decision was pronounced in open court.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
