https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783826 The dominant issue was whether refusal to condone a delay of over four months in filing the statutory appeal warranted interference under Art. 226. The HC held that "sufficient cause" was not established because no contemporaneous material was produced to substantiate the asserted hospitalisation of counsel's spouse, and no supporting affidavit or documents were filed either before the appellate authority or with the writ petition despite repeated opportunities and adjournments. Consequently, the HC found no arbitrariness or perversity in the delay-based dismissal and declined to exercise writ jurisdiction; the petition was dismissed. en-us Mon, 08 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Dec 2025 07:59:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783826 The dominant issue was whether refusal to condone a delay of over four months in filing the statutory appeal warranted interference under Art. 226. The HC held that "sufficient cause" was not established because no contemporaneous material was produced to substantiate the asserted hospitalisation of counsel's spouse, and no supporting affidavit or documents were filed either before the appellate authority or with the writ petition despite repeated opportunities and adjournments. Consequently, the HC found no arbitrariness or perversity in the delay-based dismissal and declined to exercise writ jurisdiction; the petition was dismissed. Case-Laws GST Mon, 08 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783826