Statutory limitation with capped condonation bars appellate delay beyond the outer limit under a fiscal enactment.

Where a fiscal statute fixes a limitation period for appeal and permits condonation only up to a statutory outer cap, delay beyond that cap is not condonable and the appellate forum has no jurisdiction to extend time. The same principle excludes recourse to Section 5 of the Limitation Act when the statute's scheme shows a clear legislative limit on condonation. On that basis, a writ court cannot direct the appellate tribunal to entertain an appeal filed after expiry of the maximum permissible condonation period, and the remedy remains time-barred.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ court can direct the appellate tribunal to entertain an appeal filed beyond the statutory outer limit prescribed for condonation of delay under the value added tax enactment.

Analysis: The appeal provision under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act prescribed a fixed time for filing an appeal and permitted condonation only up to a further limited period. Once that outer limit expired, the appellate forum had no jurisdiction to extend time. The reasoning was reinforced by Supreme Court authority holding that where a statute creates a capped condonation period, Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply, and that statutory limitation must be respected according to legislative intent.

Conclusion: The requested direction could not be issued and the delay beyond the statutory cap was not condonable.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed because the appellate remedy had become time-barred beyond the period that the statute permitted to be condoned.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a fiscal statute prescribes a fixed limitation period with a limited outer cap for condonation, the appellate authority cannot condone delay beyond that cap and Section 5 of the Limitation Act stands excluded.

---