<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (4) TMI 715 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789646</link>
    <description>Recall of an ex parte order requires proof of sufficient cause for non-appearance, and the Tribunal will not reopen proceedings where a party repeatedly failed to attend despite several opportunities. The explanation of illness, a partner&#039;s father&#039;s demise, and alleged counsel lapse was found insufficient because other partners could have appeared. Review is limited to error apparent on the face of the record, and a request to place additional documents on record cannot be pursued unless recall is first granted; here, the additional material was also not timely produced. The recall applications were rejected and the request to admit additional documents failed with them.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2026 08:53:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=896329" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 715 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789646</link>
      <description>Recall of an ex parte order requires proof of sufficient cause for non-appearance, and the Tribunal will not reopen proceedings where a party repeatedly failed to attend despite several opportunities. The explanation of illness, a partner&#039;s father&#039;s demise, and alleged counsel lapse was found insufficient because other partners could have appeared. Review is limited to error apparent on the face of the record, and a request to place additional documents on record cannot be pursued unless recall is first granted; here, the additional material was also not timely produced. The recall applications were rejected and the request to admit additional documents failed with them.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Benami Property</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789646</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>