Condonation of delay under FEMA preserved appeal rights where prior writ proceedings in the wrong forum were excluded.

An appeal treated under Section 49(5)(c) of FEMA could be entertained after sixty days if sufficient cause was shown, and the provision did not impose any outer limit on condonation. Time spent pursuing a writ petition in the wrong forum was excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, and the remaining delay was sufficiently explained on the facts. The right of appeal and the incidental right to seek condonation were preserved in the circumstances, so the High Court had power to entertain the appeal beyond the prescribed period.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the appeal was liable to be condoned and whether the High Court had power to entertain the appeal beyond the prescribed period.

Analysis: The appeal was treated as one under Section 49(5)(c) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 after repeal of the earlier enactment. That provision allowed the High Court to entertain an appeal filed after sixty days if sufficient cause was shown, without prescribing any outer limit for condonation. The appellant had first pursued a writ petition in the wrong forum and the period spent therein was excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Even on the respondent's alternative construction, the remaining delay stood sufficiently explained. The Court also accepted that the right of appeal and the incidental right to seek condonation of delay were preserved in the circumstances.

Conclusion: The delay was condonable and the High Court had power to entertain the appeal.

---