<?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 (10) TMI 557 - GSTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800614</link>
    <description>Section 107 confines the First Appellate Authority&#039;s power to condone delay to the prescribed appeal period plus the statutorily permitted further period; equitable considerations and High Court powers under Article 226 cannot enlarge that jurisdiction. Delay condoned beyond the outer limit is therefore beyond jurisdiction. Implementation of registration-restoration orders may nevertheless make a departmental challenge ineffective where restoration has altered parties&#039; positions, enabled continuing compliance, and created genuine intervening transactions. Revocation under Rule 23 and appeal against cancellation operate as alternative remedies, so inability or failure to seek revocation does not bar a statutory appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 08:45:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=928569" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (10) TMI 557 - GSTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800614</link>
      <description>Section 107 confines the First Appellate Authority&#039;s power to condone delay to the prescribed appeal period plus the statutorily permitted further period; equitable considerations and High Court powers under Article 226 cannot enlarge that jurisdiction. Delay condoned beyond the outer limit is therefore beyond jurisdiction. Implementation of registration-restoration orders may nevertheless make a departmental challenge ineffective where restoration has altered parties&#039; positions, enabled continuing compliance, and created genuine intervening transactions. Revocation under Rule 23 and appeal against cancellation operate as alternative remedies, so inability or failure to seek revocation does not bar a statutory appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800614</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>