https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444019 Recall jurisdiction was confined to cases of fraud, collusion, patent lack of jurisdiction, or a clear mistake causing prejudice, and it could not be used where the grievance should have been raised earlier or where the party had acquiesced. The record showed the connected appeals were repeatedly heard together over a long period, the applicants were represented throughout, and no timely objection was made that one appeal had not been argued. Natural justice was found to have been followed, and no basis existed to recall the orders dated 19.07.2023 and 31.07.2023. en-us Fri, 06 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Oct 2023 16:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444019 Recall jurisdiction was confined to cases of fraud, collusion, patent lack of jurisdiction, or a clear mistake causing prejudice, and it could not be used where the grievance should have been raised earlier or where the party had acquiesced. The record showed the connected appeals were repeatedly heard together over a long period, the applicants were represented throughout, and no timely objection was made that one appeal had not been argued. Natural justice was found to have been followed, and no basis existed to recall the orders dated 19.07.2023 and 31.07.2023. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 06 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444019