Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Objective characteristics govern magnesium bis-glycinate chelate classification as an amino-acid coordination compound, not a food preparation or anti...
Independent professional certification requires pleaded knowledge or complicity for criminal liability; untimely complaints remain barred by limitatio...
The judgment addresses the jurisdiction and competence of the Appellate Authority u/s 107(4) of the Act of 2017 to condone delays in filing appeals against decisions or orders passed by an adjudicating authority beyond the prescribed time limit. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Bengal Chemists and Druggists Association v. Kalyan Chowdhury, which interpreted a similar provision in the Companies Act, 2013. It held that the Appellate Authority cannot entertain an appeal u/s 107 if it is filed beyond four months from the date of communication of the decision or order. While the High Court has extraordinary jurisdiction to condone delays in exceptional circumstances to prevent gross injustice, the reasons provided by the petitioner were found insufficient to warrant such exercise. Consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed as lacking merit.
The judgment addresses the jurisdiction and competence of the Appellate Authority u/s 107(4) of the Act of 2017 to condone delays in filing appeals against decisions or orders passed by an adjudicating authority beyond the prescribed time limit. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Bengal Chemists and Druggists Association v. Kalyan Chowdhury, which interpreted a similar provision in the Companies Act, 2013. It held that the Appellate Authority cannot entertain an appeal u/s 107 if it is filed beyond four months from the date of communication of the decision or order. While the High Court has extraordinary jurisdiction to condone delays in exceptional circumstances to prevent gross injustice, the reasons provided by the petitioner were found insufficient to warrant such exercise. Consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed as lacking merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4780
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
