https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403443 Undue delay in pronouncing an adjudication order can justify interference where the delay is unexplained and causes prejudice to the affected party. On the facts, the hearing had concluded long before the order was delivered, and the appellant argued that the belated order failed to address the factual and legal submissions made before the adjudicating authority. The Court accepted that the combination of inordinate delay and resultant prejudice warranted setting aside the impugned order in relation to the appellant, and it confined its consideration to the delay issue without examining the FERA allegations on merits. en-us Mon, 25 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Jan 2021 13:32:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403443 Undue delay in pronouncing an adjudication order can justify interference where the delay is unexplained and causes prejudice to the affected party. On the facts, the hearing had concluded long before the order was delivered, and the appellant argued that the belated order failed to address the factual and legal submissions made before the adjudicating authority. The Court accepted that the combination of inordinate delay and resultant prejudice warranted setting aside the impugned order in relation to the appellant, and it confined its consideration to the delay issue without examining the FERA allegations on merits. Case-Laws Money Laundering Mon, 25 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403443