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 delay in filing the appeals before the first appellate authority and the Tribunal ought to be condoned, and whether the matters should be restored to the first appellate authority for adjudication on merits.
Analysis: The appeals were dismissed by the first appellate authority on grounds of delay, non-maintainability, or defect, without entering into the merits. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's explanation that the original orders were not available in time, and that the appeals had been pursued on the basis of available default summaries and later obtained orders. Applying the principle that procedural delay should not defeat substantive justice where sufficient cause is shown, and relying on the need to decide matters on merits after giving adequate opportunity of hearing, the Tribunal found justification to interfere with the dismissal orders.
Conclusion: The delay was condoned, the orders of the first appellate authority were set aside, and the matters were restored to that authority for fresh adjudication on merits after granting adequate opportunity to the assessee. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.
Ratio Decidendi: Where sufficient cause is shown, delay ought to be condoned so that disputes are decided on merits rather than defeated by procedural default.