Legacy dispute resolution relief cannot be claimed after expiry when natural justice was not breached.

No interference was warranted with the adjudication order where the petitioner had been repeatedly informed of the legacy dispute resolution scheme but did not avail it within time. The Court found no breach of natural justice in the original adjudication process and rejected the request for relief after expiry of the scheme. It also recorded that it had not examined the merits of the tax demand and that other remedies available in law would remain open.

---

---

Issues: Whether interference was warranted with the original adjudication order and the petitioner's request for relief under the legacy dispute resolution scheme.

Analysis: The petitioner was repeatedly informed of the availability of the scheme and had an opportunity to avail it, but did not do so within time. The Court found no breach of natural justice in the adjudication process and no basis to interfere merely because the petitioner later sought relief after expiry of the scheme. The Court also noted that it had not entered into the merits of the tax demand and that other remedies available in law would remain open.

Conclusion: No interference was called for, and the challenge to the adjudication order and related reliefs was rejected.

---