https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194021 Order XXII Rule 4(4) confers a discretionary exemption from substituting the legal representatives of a deceased respondent, but it is unlikely to be exercised where the deceased had a right to contest the appeal and notice had already been served during his lifetime. Delay in seeking substitution and setting aside abatement is governed by Articles 120 and 121 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and condonation under Section 5 requires a reasonable, bona fide explanation showing sufficient cause. Where the explanation is unsupported, implausible, and marked by negligence or lack of diligence, the delay is not condonable and the abatement application fails. en-us Wed, 12 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Aug 2017 10:20:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194021 Order XXII Rule 4(4) confers a discretionary exemption from substituting the legal representatives of a deceased respondent, but it is unlikely to be exercised where the deceased had a right to contest the appeal and notice had already been served during his lifetime. Delay in seeking substitution and setting aside abatement is governed by Articles 120 and 121 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and condonation under Section 5 requires a reasonable, bona fide explanation showing sufficient cause. Where the explanation is unsupported, implausible, and marked by negligence or lack of diligence, the delay is not condonable and the abatement application fails. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 12 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194021