https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200873 The court held that service of the order on the counsel did not constitute proper service on the party, leading to a delay in filing the appeal. The delay was condoned as it fell within the permissible limit, and the registry was instructed to proceed with the appeal. The court did not address the challenge to the validity of Rule 5 separately, as resolving the service issue made it unnecessary to rule on the rule's constitutionality. No costs were awarded in the case. en-us Thu, 03 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Apr 2018 06:08:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200873 The court held that service of the order on the counsel did not constitute proper service on the party, leading to a delay in filing the appeal. The delay was condoned as it fell within the permissible limit, and the registry was instructed to proceed with the appeal. The court did not address the challenge to the validity of Rule 5 separately, as resolving the service issue made it unnecessary to rule on the rule's constitutionality. No costs were awarded in the case. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 03 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200873