https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440789 Limitation for a recall and restoration application was computed from receipt of the earlier judgment and order, not from the later recovery notice. The applicant had been served at an interlocutory stage, failed to prosecute the matter diligently, and sought condonation after an unexplained belated delay without even specifying the exact delay. The Court held that such conduct could not be justified by relying on the High Court's paper-book rules, which did not excuse non-diligence or revive an otherwise stale application. The delay was not condoned and the application for recalling the judgment and restoring the appeal was rejected. en-us Mon, 17 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Jul 2023 08:04:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440789 Limitation for a recall and restoration application was computed from receipt of the earlier judgment and order, not from the later recovery notice. The applicant had been served at an interlocutory stage, failed to prosecute the matter diligently, and sought condonation after an unexplained belated delay without even specifying the exact delay. The Court held that such conduct could not be justified by relying on the High Court's paper-book rules, which did not excuse non-diligence or revive an otherwise stale application. The delay was not condoned and the application for recalling the judgment and restoring the appeal was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 17 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440789