https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47009 Where a statute prescribes both a limitation period and an outer limit for condonation, the authority has no jurisdiction to extend time beyond that fixed maximum, and statutory text must be applied as enacted. The article explains that the appellate authority therefore could not entertain a delayed appeal beyond the prescribed limit, and refusal to condone delay was legally correct. It also states that an order is not vitiated merely because it cites the wrong statutory provision, so long as the power exists in law and the decision is otherwise sustainable. On that basis, the challenge to the refusal to entertain the delayed appeal failed. en-us Thu, 05 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Jul 2010 13:20:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47009 Where a statute prescribes both a limitation period and an outer limit for condonation, the authority has no jurisdiction to extend time beyond that fixed maximum, and statutory text must be applied as enacted. The article explains that the appellate authority therefore could not entertain a delayed appeal beyond the prescribed limit, and refusal to condone delay was legally correct. It also states that an order is not vitiated merely because it cites the wrong statutory provision, so long as the power exists in law and the decision is otherwise sustainable. On that basis, the challenge to the refusal to entertain the delayed appeal failed. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 05 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47009