https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186346 The appeal was dismissed as the Court held that challenging orders beyond the statutory limitation period, as prescribed under Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994, was impermissible. The Court emphasized the significance of adhering to limitation periods and the consequences of bypassing statutory procedures. The appellant's delay in challenging the order after the expiration of the limitation period was not allowed, as it would defeat the purpose of the provision. The Court also highlighted the principle that lack of jurisdiction by an authority renders its order void in the eyes of the law. en-us Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Jan 2017 12:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186346 The appeal was dismissed as the Court held that challenging orders beyond the statutory limitation period, as prescribed under Section 85(3A) of the Finance Act, 1994, was impermissible. The Court emphasized the significance of adhering to limitation periods and the consequences of bypassing statutory procedures. The appellant's delay in challenging the order after the expiration of the limitation period was not allowed, as it would defeat the purpose of the provision. The Court also highlighted the principle that lack of jurisdiction by an authority renders its order void in the eyes of the law. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186346