Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
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: (i) Whether the delay in filing the statutory appeal could be condoned despite the limitation prescribed under section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994. (ii) Whether the impugned appellate order and the underlying order deserved to be set aside so that the appeal could be heard on merits.
Issue (i): Whether the delay in filing the statutory appeal could be condoned despite the limitation prescribed under section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994.
Analysis: The delay was found to have occurred for reasons beyond the petitioner's control, and the matter was treated as one where denial of adjudication on merits would cause prejudice. The statutory limitation under section 85 was acknowledged, but the Court followed its consistent approach in similar matters and granted relief on the basis of the circumstances shown.
Conclusion: The delay was condoned in favour of the petitioner.
Issue (ii): Whether the impugned appellate order and the underlying order deserved to be set aside so that the appeal could be heard on merits.
Analysis: Once delay was condoned, the orders preventing consideration of the appeal could not stand, and the appellate forum was directed to consider the appeal in accordance with law. The relief was linked to compliance with the directed statutory deposit.
Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside and the appeal was directed to be decided on merits in favour of the petitioner.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded to the extent of restoring the appellate remedy by condoning delay and enabling adjudication of the appeal on merits.
Ratio Decidendi: Where delay in filing a statutory appeal is shown to have arisen for bona fide reasons beyond the party's control, and rigid enforcement of limitation would defeat adjudication on merits, the writ court may grant condonation and direct the appeal to be heard in accordance with law.