Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
The HC allowed the writ petition, holding that the petitioners' explanation for a 93-day delay in filing the statutory appeal - namely incapacitation of their consultant supported by a psychiatrist's certificate - was reasonable, plausible and not indicative of gross negligence or deliberate laches. The court condoned the delay, set aside the impugned appellate order dated March 29, 2025, and remitted the matter to the Appellate Authority for adjudication on merits. The petition is disposed of accordingly, with directions limited to restoration of the appeal for fresh hearing before the appropriate appellate forum.
The HC allowed the writ petition, holding that the petitioners' explanation for a 93-day delay in filing the statutory appeal - namely incapacitation of their consultant supported by a psychiatrist's certificate - was reasonable, plausible and not indicative of gross negligence or deliberate laches. The court condoned the delay, set aside the impugned appellate order dated March 29, 2025, and remitted the matter to the Appellate Authority for adjudication on merits. The petition is disposed of accordingly, with directions limited to restoration of the appeal for fresh hearing before the appropriate appellate forum.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.