Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1201 to 1220 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Writ jurisdiction can be used to condone delay in filing a statutory appeal where the delay was shown to be beyond the appellant's control and refusal to hear the matter on merits would cause grave prejudice. Although the appellate authority lacked power to condone delay beyond the statutory limit under Section 107, the High Court followed its earlier Division Bench view and intervened to prevent injustice. The 84-day delay was therefore condoned, the time-bar dismissal was set aside, and the appellate authority was directed to entertain and decide the appeal on merits.
Writ jurisdiction can be used to condone delay in filing a statutory appeal where the delay was shown to be beyond the appellant's control and refusal to hear the matter on merits would cause grave prejudice. Although the appellate authority lacked power to condone delay beyond the statutory limit under Section 107, the High Court followed its earlier Division Bench view and intervened to prevent injustice. The 84-day delay was therefore condoned, the time-bar dismissal was set aside, and the appellate authority was directed to entertain and decide the appeal on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.