https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175057 The Delhi HC held that Rule 7(2) of the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1977 was within the rule-making power under the special welfare statute because the Act authorised prescription of the appeal period and a limited extension for sufficient cause. It further held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 did not apply to appeals under Section 7-I where the special law fixed a specific limitation period and an outer limit for condonation, as Section 29(2) excluded any wider recourse. The Tribunal therefore had no jurisdiction to extend delay beyond the period fixed by the Rules. en-us Wed, 27 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Nov 2015 17:17:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175057 The Delhi HC held that Rule 7(2) of the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1977 was within the rule-making power under the special welfare statute because the Act authorised prescription of the appeal period and a limited extension for sufficient cause. It further held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 did not apply to appeals under Section 7-I where the special law fixed a specific limitation period and an outer limit for condonation, as Section 29(2) excluded any wider recourse. The Tribunal therefore had no jurisdiction to extend delay beyond the period fixed by the Rules. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 27 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175057