https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441074 Where an appellate order was served during the period covered by the Supreme Court's Covid-19 limitation directions, that excluded period had to be left out while computing limitation under section 35 of the Goa Value Added Tax Act, 2005. The appeal period therefore ran from 01.03.2022, and the view that only 90 days remained from that date was incorrect on the facts. The refusal to condone delay was unsustainable, and the condonation application had to be reconsidered afresh on merits under section 35(2). en-us Fri, 28 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Aug 2023 10:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441074 Where an appellate order was served during the period covered by the Supreme Court's Covid-19 limitation directions, that excluded period had to be left out while computing limitation under section 35 of the Goa Value Added Tax Act, 2005. The appeal period therefore ran from 01.03.2022, and the view that only 90 days remained from that date was incorrect on the facts. The refusal to condone delay was unsustainable, and the condonation application had to be reconsidered afresh on merits under section 35(2). Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 28 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441074