Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>High Court quashes Tribunal order, allows appeal, condones delay, directs costs.</h1> The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the Tribunal's order, and condoned the 266-day delay in filing the appeal. The Assessee was directed to pay ... Condonation of delay - Inordinate delay of 266 days in filing of the Appeal - Held that:- Even the Tribunal, does not refer to the delay of more than 12 years and as claimed by the Revenue. It refers to the period of delay as of 266 days. That it relies on the fact that even after obtaining the information and receiving the copy of the adjudication order, the Assessee failed to file the Appeal in time. Thus, this delay has not been satisfactorily explained. - if there was doubt and which could be inferred from the records and information provided to the Assessee by the Revenue after he invoked the Right to Information Act, 2005, then, the Tribunal should have condoned the delay and in all fairness and in the interest of justice. Eventually if the Assessee cannot be faulted for being negligent or reckless in pursuing the remedy, then, the delay could have been condoned by compensation of payment of costs. - The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The delay of 266 days is condoned in the peculiar facts and circumstances but by directing that the Appellant- Assessee before us, shall pay costs quantified at ₹ 25 ,000 /- within a period of four weeks from the receipt of copy of this order. If these costs are paid and the proof is produced, the Tribunal shall restore the Appeal, register it and hear and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law. - Decided conditionally in favour of assesssee. Issues:1. Condonation of delay in filing an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal.2. Legality and validity of the order passed by the Tribunal.3. Communication and service of the adjudication order to the Assessee.4. Application of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in obtaining relevant information.5. Discretion of the Tribunal in condoning delay and the imposition of costs.Analysis:1. The Assessee filed an appeal questioning the legality of an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, seeking condonation of a 266-day delay in filing the appeal. The Assessee claimed that due to the closure of the unit and unavailability of records, they only became aware of the adjudication order in 2011 through the Right to Information Act, 2005. The Assessee argued for condonation based on the peculiar circumstances. However, the Revenue contended that the show cause notice and adjudication order were duly served, with postal remarks indicating non-claim and refusal. The Tribunal refused to exercise discretion in favor of the Assessee, dismissing the application for condonation.2. The High Court observed that substantial questions of law were raised in the appeal concerning the sustainability of the Tribunal's order. The Court considered whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that there was a delay in filing the appeal. The Senior Counsel for the Assessee argued that the adjudication order was served in 2011, not promptly after its issuance, and disputed the accuracy of the postal remarks cited by the Revenue. The Court noted that the delay of 266 days was not satisfactorily explained by the Assessee, who failed to file the appeal promptly even after receiving the order.3. The Court emphasized that if doubts arose from the information provided under the Right to Information Act, 2005, the Tribunal should have condoned the delay in the interest of justice. Considering the Assessee's pursuit of remedy without negligence, the Court allowed the appeal, quashed the impugned order, and condoned the 266-day delay. However, the Court directed the Assessee to pay costs of Rs. 25,000 within four weeks. Upon payment, the Tribunal was instructed to restore, register, and hear the appeal on merits and in accordance with the law, keeping all contentions open for both parties.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found