9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 262X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT) LTU, KAKINADA ORS. VERSUS M/S. GLAXO SMITH KLINE CONSUMER HEALTH CARE LIMITED [ 2020 (5) TMI 149 - SUPREME COURT] where it was held that Be that as it may, since the statutory period specified for filing of appeal had expired long back in August, 2017 itself and the appeal came to be filed by the respondent only on 24.9.2018, without substantiating the plea about inability to file appeal within the prescribed time, no indulgence could be shown to the respondent at all. However, at the same time, it has to be considered that the petitioner was not in a position to file an appeal prior to the date as is evident from the documents filed by the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 SCC Online SC 440/2020 (36) G.S.T.L. 305 (S.C.), wherein, in Paragraph 17, it has been held as under:- 15. ...., it is clear as crystal that the Constitution Bench in Supreme Court Bar Assn. v. Union of India, (1998) 4 SCC 409, has rules that there is no conflict of opinion in Antulay case [A.R.Antulay v. R.S.Nayak, (1988) 2 SCC 602] or in Union Carbide Corpn. case [Union Carbide Corpn. v. Union of India, (1991) 4 SCC 584] with the principle set down in Prem Chand Garg v. Excise Commr., AIR 1963 SC 996. Be it noted, when there is a statutory command by the legislation as regards limitation and there is the postulate that delay can be condoned for a further period not exceeding sixty days, needless to say, it is based on certain unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dent, the petitioner had left the Country and went to Canada and returned only on 26.02.2023 that is last date for filing the appeal with an application to condone the delay of 30 days in filing the appeal before the first respondent. 7. The order passed by the first respondent Appellant Commissioner cannot be faulted in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited case (referred to supra). 8. However, at the same time, it has to be considered that the petitioner was not in a position to file an appeal prior to the date as is evident from the documents filed by the petitioner indicating that the petitioner was out of country between 24.11.2022 to 26.02.2023. 9. Considerin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
