Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
Insurer's investment gains and investment write-downs face Section 263 revision; enquiry upheld, Rule 5(b)(ii) lapse sustained, late corrigendum quash...
Appellate authority lacked power to condone delay beyond the statutory 90-day limitation, so its dismissal on an 88-day delay was technically proper. The High Court, exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226, may condone delay if reasons are stated in the memo of appeal; on the facts hospitalisation of the appellant's mother for cancer and a bona fide deposit (7.5%) towards filing the High Court exercised that power and set aside the impugned order, with stay operating in favour of the appellant since 06.02.2017.
Appellate authority lacked power to condone delay beyond the statutory 90-day limitation, so its dismissal on an 88-day delay was technically proper. The High Court, exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226, may condone delay if reasons are stated in the memo of appeal; on the facts hospitalisation of the appellant's mother for cancer and a bona fide deposit (7.5%) towards filing the High Court exercised that power and set aside the impugned order, with stay operating in favour of the appellant since 06.02.2017.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.