https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95783 Delay of about 57 days in filing an appeal under s.107 of the 2017 Act against an order under s.73 was held to be supported by sufficient cause where the delay was attributable to the illness of the appellant's accountant, affirmed by affidavit and not disbelieved by the appellate authority; rejection solely because the accountant was not an authorized signatory ignored the accountant's material role in preparing the appeal and did not establish gross negligence. Applying s.5 of the Limitation Act, the delay was condoned, the appellate rejection was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision on merits. - HC en-us Tue, 06 Jan 2026 22:01:29 +0530 Tue, 06 Jan 2026 22:01:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95783 Delay of about 57 days in filing an appeal under s.107 of the 2017 Act against an order under s.73 was held to be supported by sufficient cause where the delay was attributable to the illness of the appellant's accountant, affirmed by affidavit and not disbelieved by the appellate authority; rejection solely because the accountant was not an authorized signatory ignored the accountant's material role in preparing the appeal and did not establish gross negligence. Applying s.5 of the Limitation Act, the delay was condoned, the appellate rejection was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision on merits. - HC Highlights GST Tue, 06 Jan 2026 22:01:29 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95783