<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1989 (8) TMI 233 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80238</link>
    <description>Delay in filing an appeal may be condoned where the applicant gives a credible explanation showing bona fide cause and absence of deliberate inaction. Here, the Tribunal accepted that the appeal papers were handed to counsel, misplaced in counsel&#039;s office, and traced later, while the company director&#039;s illness also affected prosecution of the appeal. Although the revenue challenged the explanation as negligent for lack of steps during the intervening period, the Tribunal relied on the advocate&#039;s affidavit and contemporaneous letter, found no reason to disbelieve the account, and exercised judicial discretion to condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2011 16:08:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117384" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (8) TMI 233 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80238</link>
      <description>Delay in filing an appeal may be condoned where the applicant gives a credible explanation showing bona fide cause and absence of deliberate inaction. Here, the Tribunal accepted that the appeal papers were handed to counsel, misplaced in counsel&#039;s office, and traced later, while the company director&#039;s illness also affected prosecution of the appeal. Although the revenue challenged the explanation as negligent for lack of steps during the intervening period, the Tribunal relied on the advocate&#039;s affidavit and contemporaneous letter, found no reason to disbelieve the account, and exercised judicial discretion to condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80238</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>