Abuse of dominant position allegations against an exchange found not prima facie; regulator reliance on sectoral expertise upheld and no investigation...
Regulatory consolidation for investment advisers: SEBI issues master circular consolidating guidance and prescribing compliance, reporting, fees and s...
The dominant issue was whether a 2262-day delay in filing a statutory appeal should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Applying the liberal construction of "sufficient cause" to advance substantial justice, the court held that the tribunal erred in treating the appellant's inaction as "total negligence," particularly given the SC's directions excluding 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 for limitation due to COVID-19 and the impracticality of expecting daily portal monitoring. Since refusal would effectively bar scrutiny of a substantial penalty on merits, the delay was condoned and the question of law was answered in the appellant's favour. - HC
The dominant issue was whether a 2262-day delay in filing a statutory appeal should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Applying the liberal construction of "sufficient cause" to advance substantial justice, the court held that the tribunal erred in treating the appellant's inaction as "total negligence," particularly given the SC's directions excluding 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 for limitation due to COVID-19 and the impracticality of expecting daily portal monitoring. Since refusal would effectively bar scrutiny of a substantial penalty on merits, the delay was condoned and the question of law was answered in the appellant's favour. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
