https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264060 A firm may act through a person competent in law to represent it, and a partner was not incompetent to seek restoration merely because the original appeal had been filed through an authorised representative. The Tribunal was found to have taken a hyper-technical view and failed to consider the grievance that notice of posting was not received. On that basis, the finding that no sufficient cause was shown was unsustainable. The dismissal of the restoration petition was therefore set aside, and the appeal was restored for consideration after notice to the petitioner. en-us Tue, 09 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Sep 2015 06:49:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264060 A firm may act through a person competent in law to represent it, and a partner was not incompetent to seek restoration merely because the original appeal had been filed through an authorised representative. The Tribunal was found to have taken a hyper-technical view and failed to consider the grievance that notice of posting was not received. On that basis, the finding that no sufficient cause was shown was unsustainable. The dismissal of the restoration petition was therefore set aside, and the appeal was restored for consideration after notice to the petitioner. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 09 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264060