https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86625 The HC declined to interfere with the Tribunal's refusal to condone a 188-day delay in filing an appeal. The Court recognized its limited supervisory jurisdiction, noting it cannot function as an appellate authority when reviewing such discretionary decisions. The Tribunal's determination regarding insufficient cause for delay showed no illegality or perversity warranting judicial intervention. The Court rejected the petitioner's misplaced reliance on CPC provisions and emphasized that the appropriate remedy was filing an appeal under Section 15Z of SEBI Act, 1992, rather than pursuing a writ petition. Finding no violation of natural justice or statutory requirements, the HC dismissed the petition as lacking merit. en-us Wed, 19 Mar 2025 06:45:29 +0530 Wed, 19 Mar 2025 06:45:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86625 The HC declined to interfere with the Tribunal's refusal to condone a 188-day delay in filing an appeal. The Court recognized its limited supervisory jurisdiction, noting it cannot function as an appellate authority when reviewing such discretionary decisions. The Tribunal's determination regarding insufficient cause for delay showed no illegality or perversity warranting judicial intervention. The Court rejected the petitioner's misplaced reliance on CPC provisions and emphasized that the appropriate remedy was filing an appeal under Section 15Z of SEBI Act, 1992, rather than pursuing a writ petition. Finding no violation of natural justice or statutory requirements, the HC dismissed the petition as lacking merit. Highlights SEBI Wed, 19 Mar 2025 06:45:29 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=86625