Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Insolvency and BankruptcyAugust 10, 2024Case LawsAT
Condonation of delay in filing the appeal was denied as the appellant failed to fulfill the prerequisites for invoking Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The court held that the appellant was guilty of negligence, lapse, or inaction, and there was no jurisdictional defect or similar cause for the failure of the prior proceeding. The judgment in State Bank of India vs. Visa Steel Ltd. regarding excluding time spent in prosecuting legal remedies while computing limitation u/s 61(2) was distinguished as inapplicable to the present case. Consequently, the period from 08.06.2023 to 03.01.2024 could not be excluded, resulting in a delay of 209 days, exceeding the condonable period of 15 days. The appeal was dismissed due to the inordinate delay.
Condonation of delay in filing the appeal was denied as the appellant failed to fulfill the prerequisites for invoking Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The court held that the appellant was guilty of negligence, lapse, or inaction, and there was no jurisdictional defect or similar cause for the failure of the prior proceeding. The judgment in State Bank of India vs. Visa Steel Ltd. regarding excluding time spent in prosecuting legal remedies while computing limitation u/s 61(2) was distinguished as inapplicable to the present case. Consequently, the period from 08.06.2023 to 03.01.2024 could not be excluded, resulting in a delay of 209 days, exceeding the condonable period of 15 days. The appeal was dismissed due to the inordinate delay.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
