<?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>2016 (7) TMI 993 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330395</link>
    <description>Under the MVAT appellate scheme, delay in filing an appeal may be condoned where sufficient cause is shown, because the High Court&#039;s appellate power is not excluded by the limitation provisions and the statute expressly permits extension of time. The notices of motion seeking condonation were therefore maintainable. However, the explanations offered for the long delays were vague, omnibus and unsupported, and internal government correspondence or the pendency of a special leave petition did not account for the substantial unexplained period. Applying the principle that the State is equally bound by limitation, the Court held that no sufficient cause was made out and refused condonation, so the appeals could not be entertained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Mar 2017 17:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=435975" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 993 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330395</link>
      <description>Under the MVAT appellate scheme, delay in filing an appeal may be condoned where sufficient cause is shown, because the High Court&#039;s appellate power is not excluded by the limitation provisions and the statute expressly permits extension of time. The notices of motion seeking condonation were therefore maintainable. However, the explanations offered for the long delays were vague, omnibus and unsupported, and internal government correspondence or the pendency of a special leave petition did not account for the substantial unexplained period. Applying the principle that the State is equally bound by limitation, the Court held that no sufficient cause was made out and refused condonation, so the appeals could not be entertained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330395</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>