9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed under Section 73(9) of the said Act. Simultaneously, with the filing of the appeal, the petitioner had also made a requisite pre-deposit. As such there is no lack of bona fide on the part of the petitioner in preferring the appeal. It appears that the petitioner had also made a prayer for condonation of delay, inter alia, claiming that by reasons of lack of proper knowledge of the GST port ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of communication of this order. Petition disposed off. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ority without entering into the merits of the case is rejected the appeal on the ground the limitation. Mr. Siddiqui, learned advocate enters appearance on behalf of the State-respondents. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considered the materials on record. Admittedly, in this case the petitioner had filed an appeal challenging the order passed under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for condonation of delay filed by the petitioner. The appellate authority, however, appears to have rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation by, inter alia, holding that the delay can only be condoned provided the same is filed within the period of one month of the time prescribed. The aforesaid would demonstrate that the appellate authority had failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
