Tribunal restores appeal due to new cause of action, grants adjournment for appellant's counsel. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI acknowledged the appellant's difficulties in filing the appeal on time due to a later arising cause of action. The ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Tribunal restores appeal due to new cause of action, grants adjournment for appellant's counsel.
The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI acknowledged the appellant's difficulties in filing the appeal on time due to a later arising cause of action. The Tribunal restored the appeal, allowing an adjournment for the appellant's counsel. It was recognized that the appellant became aggrieved on a specific date, leading to a reconsideration of the limitation for filing the appeal. The Tribunal set aside the dismissal order and directed the ld. Commissioner to consider the appeal on its merits. The appellant was instructed to schedule a hearing promptly without adjournment. The appeal was restored and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues: Appeal dismissal due to time-barred filing before Commissioner (Appeals), request for restoration and remand for consideration on merit.
In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI, the appellant's counsel informed the Tribunal about his pre-occupation, requesting an adjournment for the appeal hearing. However, this information was not brought to the Tribunal's notice, leading to the dismissal of the appeal on the grounds of being time-barred before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant argued that the appeal was not time-barred as the cause of action arose on a later date than the filing of the bill of entry. The Tribunal considered the difficulties expressed and restored the appeal, allowing the request for adjournment. It was acknowledged that a person becomes aggrieved only when the order is finalized, and in this case, the appellant was aggrieved on a specific date, leading to a reconsideration of the limitation for filing the appeal from that date. The Tribunal set aside the previous order and directed the ld. Commissioner to pass an appropriate order on the merit of the appeal. The appellant was instructed to make an application to the ld. Commissioner within a month to fix a hearing date, emphasizing the need for the appellant's presence without adjournment to contest the appeal effectively. The Tribunal allowed the MA (ROA), restored the appeal, and remanded it to the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) for further proceedings.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
