TaxTMI Login
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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the delay in filing the appeals before the first appellate authority should be condoned, and whether the matters should be remanded for decision on merits.
Analysis: The delay was found to be unintentional and attributable to misplacement of documents in the office of the earlier counsel. Relying on the principle that a litigant should not suffer for the lapse of counsel, the Tribunal held that the delay deserved to be condoned. As the first appellate authority had dismissed the appeals only as time-barred and had not examined the merits, remand was considered appropriate so that the appeals could be decided afresh without going into limitation, after granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing to both sides.
Conclusion: The delay was condoned and the matters were remanded to the first appellate authority for fresh on merits.
Final Conclusion: The appellants obtained relief on the limitation issue, and the disputes were sent back for adjudication on merits with an opportunity of hearing to both sides.
Ratio Decidendi: A bona fide and unintentional delay caused by counsel-related lapse can be condoned, and where the first appellate authority has not examined the merits, remand is appropriate for fresh adjudication.
TaxTMI 
