9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (9) TMI 931 - HC - Central ExciseCondonation of Delay Delay of 425 days - Held that - The reasons for delay were spelt out in the application more particularly - the delay in filing restoration application occasioned unintentionally and failure to remove the office objection could be said to be inadvertent can be fully relied - The main Tax Appeal was, therefore, dismissed even before it could be considered for admission by the Court - there was no question of other side appearing in the matter - The other side was not given any notice and appeal was dismissed at the stage of removal of office objection Decided in favour of Assessee - Delay condoned.
Issues Involved:
Condonation of delay in filing restoration application due to dismissal of main Tax Appeal for failure to remove office objection. Analysis: The judgment delivered by the Gujarat High Court concerns the condonation of a 425-day delay in filing a restoration application, O.J. Misc. Civil Application No. 739 of 2012, after the main Tax Appeal No. 2579 of 2010 was dismissed for the appellant's failure to address an office objection. The applicant's advocate explained that the office objection was related to the non-supply of legible typed copies of certain annexures, which the applicant mistakenly believed had been complied with. Upon discovering the dismissal of the appeal, a restoration application was promptly filed, leading to the significant delay in submission. The court acknowledged that the delay was unintentional and attributed to inadvertence, as the office objection had not been addressed, and the main Tax Appeal was dismissed before being considered for admission. As a result, the opposing party was not notified, and the appeal was dismissed solely due to the failure to address the office objection, without any substantive consideration of the case. Consequently, the court allowed the Civil Application, condoning the 425-day delay in filing O.J. Misc. Civil Application No. 739 of 2012 and directed the registry to notify the application in question for further proceedings.
|
