<?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>1991 (6) TMI 242 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157327</link>
    <description>The prescribed limitation period for a review application does not, by itself, exclude Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Unless the governing statute expressly bars condonation, delay may be excused on sufficient cause being shown. Applying that principle, the Tribunal&#039;s reliance on the connected litigation and procedural sequence as sufficient cause was upheld, and its competence to entertain the condonation application was recognised. The delay in filing the review application was therefore validly condoned, and the revision was found to lack merit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Oct 2013 12:22:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174352" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (6) TMI 242 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157327</link>
      <description>The prescribed limitation period for a review application does not, by itself, exclude Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Unless the governing statute expressly bars condonation, delay may be excused on sufficient cause being shown. Applying that principle, the Tribunal&#039;s reliance on the connected litigation and procedural sequence as sufficient cause was upheld, and its competence to entertain the condonation application was recognised. The delay in filing the review application was therefore validly condoned, and the revision was found to lack merit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157327</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>