9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 1152X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t that despite of the fact that the case was finally heard and decided by the authority where he was represented by the counsel, he has made any attempt to find out the outcome of the case pending before the authority for more than nine years and only when a notice of demand was raised, he has filed the appeal. The only reason which has been given for delay in filing the appeal is that the counsel did not inform regarding the order passed by the authority. That cannot be considered to be a genuine reason for condoning the delay. The appellant himself should be vigilent about his rights. Once he is aware of the fact that the case is considered and heard by the authority, he should have pursued the matter or approached the counsel for knowing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... New Delhi. 2. The appellant has proposed the following substantial questions of law:- (A) Whether the learned Appellate Tribunal is correct in dismissing the application of condonation of delay when there was a genuine belief of appellant that no order in appeal existed before receiving of Sabka Vishwas letter from the department and no malafide on part of appellant in late filing of appeal? (B) Whether the learned Tribunal is correct in rejecting the appeal on preliminary stage when Hon'ble Supreme Court held in matter of Collector and others vs. Mst. Katiji and Others that liberal approach should be adopted when there is no deliberate delay on part of the appellant in filing the appeal? (C) Whether the learned T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing for the information to be given by the counsel for almost ten years, is not justifiable. Under these circumstances, we do not find it appropriate to condone the huge delay of approximately ten years in filing the appeal. 4. Further, the impugned order reflects that a copy of the order was delivered to the appellant on 05.04.2010 and the documents/acknowledgment were produced before the Tribunal on 01.07.2021. On 25.08.2021, an affidavit has been filed by the appellant to the effect that somebody from the staff might have signed on his behalf, but he does not give any information to him. The impugned order reflects that the department has produced the relevant extract of the dispatch register to show acknowledgement card pointing out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
