https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165923 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner in a case challenging an order under the Emergency Risks (Goods) Insurance Act, 1971. The court held that the appeal should be considered lodged on the day it was sent, not received, citing legal precedents. As the appeal was dispatched within the 30-day limit, the respondent's rejection of the appeal as time-barred was deemed illegal. The court ordered the appeal to be reinstated for further consideration, quashing the respondent's order. Each party was directed to bear their own costs as the respondent did not contest the case. en-us Mon, 24 May 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Aug 2014 09:57:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165923 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner in a case challenging an order under the Emergency Risks (Goods) Insurance Act, 1971. The court held that the appeal should be considered lodged on the day it was sent, not received, citing legal precedents. As the appeal was dispatched within the 30-day limit, the respondent's rejection of the appeal as time-barred was deemed illegal. The court ordered the appeal to be reinstated for further consideration, quashing the respondent's order. Each party was directed to bear their own costs as the respondent did not contest the case. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 24 May 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165923