https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217362 Delay in seeking recall was not satisfactorily explained, as the explanation for counsel's non-appearance and death did not account for the long intervening inaction, so condonation was refused. An earlier order dismissing a petition under inherent jurisdiction was treated as a merits-based decision because it recorded that no interference was required in the interests of justice, so recall of that order was not maintainable. Findings in customs appellate proceedings did not bind the criminal court and could not nullify the prosecution or justify reopening the earlier order. en-us Tue, 15 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Oct 2012 00:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217362 Delay in seeking recall was not satisfactorily explained, as the explanation for counsel's non-appearance and death did not account for the long intervening inaction, so condonation was refused. An earlier order dismissing a petition under inherent jurisdiction was treated as a merits-based decision because it recorded that no interference was required in the interests of justice, so recall of that order was not maintainable. Findings in customs appellate proceedings did not bind the criminal court and could not nullify the prosecution or justify reopening the earlier order. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 15 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217362