https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467662 Delay condonation was refused because the applicants repeated grounds already rejected and offered no new or persuasive basis showing sufficient cause to reopen the matter. Restoration was also held not maintainable, since such relief is confined to appeals dismissed for non-prosecution or cases involving an express remand; an appeal dismissed after refusal to condone delay cannot be restored through a miscellaneous application. The Tribunal therefore declined to revisit the earlier final order and treated the restoration plea as an impermissible attempt to re-agitate settled delay issues. en-us Tue, 18 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Mar 2026 18:44:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467662 Delay condonation was refused because the applicants repeated grounds already rejected and offered no new or persuasive basis showing sufficient cause to reopen the matter. Restoration was also held not maintainable, since such relief is confined to appeals dismissed for non-prosecution or cases involving an express remand; an appeal dismissed after refusal to condone delay cannot be restored through a miscellaneous application. The Tribunal therefore declined to revisit the earlier final order and treated the restoration plea as an impermissible attempt to re-agitate settled delay issues. Case-Laws SEBI Tue, 18 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467662