Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 appellate authority was bound to register the petitioners' delayed appeal and consider it in accordance with law, leaving the question of limitation open for decision by the appellate forum.
Analysis: The writ petition sought a direction to the Commissioner (Appeals) to take cognizance of the appeal and to consider the accompanying application for condonation of delay. The Court accepted the departmental stand that the issue of limitation should be decided by the appellate authority in accordance with law. It held that an appeal cannot be refused at the filing counter merely because it is beyond the permissible period of delay and that, even if time-barred, the appeal must be registered and then decided on its own merits, including the question whether delay can be condoned.
Conclusion: The petitioners were entitled to a direction for registration of the appeal, and the appellate authority was required to decide the appeal and the question of limitation in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi: A delayed appeal cannot be rejected at the threshold by the filing counter solely on limitation grounds if the appellate process requires the authority to register it and decide the question of condonation and merits according to law.