Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2025 (3) TMI 908

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ith the cogency and plausibility of the reasons set forth by the Applicant to explain the delay. Coming to our analysis, we find that one of the principal explanations given for delay is that the applicants were not available for long periods of time which led to delay in review of documents. This explanation is rather airy and light-weighted as no concrete reasons have been given to explain as to why the Applicants were absent or remained unavailable for consultation for such long periods. The refiling delay condonation application fails to explain to satisfaction as to why the Applicants were unavailable individually and collectively from 27.07.2024 to 21.09.2024 to file the application - Neither has any credible explanation been given a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rthermore, Dussehra and Diwali vacations and consequential closure of the Tribunal and absence of the legal counsel on account of vacations compounded the delay. All these factors cumulatively caused delay of 139 days in refiling the defect free appeal. It was vehemently contended that there was no intentional negligence or deliberate inaction on the part of the Applicant and hence the delay deserves to be condoned. Given the unavoidable circumstances of the present case as explained above, it was pressed that it would be just and expedient to condone the refiling delay in the interest of furthering the cause of substantial justice and protecting the Appellants from facing prejudice. 4. Elaborating their stance, the Applicant has tendered .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 4. The counsel for the Appellants took the steps to cure the defects raised by the Registry and also applied for the certified copy of the Impugned Order, which required some time. 7. However, given the festive season in the month of October, 2024, this Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal remained closed on account of Dusshera vacation from 05.10.2024 to 13.10.2024 (including Saturday and Sunday) and for Diwali vacation from 30.10.2024 to 03.11.2024. Moreover, the counsel for the Appellants was also intermittently not available due to vacations. All these factors cumulatively led to delay in filing/ refilling the Appeal after receipt of defect from the registry on 26.07.2024. 8. That it is respectfully submitted that the period of limitation .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ard both parties and seen the material on record. 7. In the present facts of case where delay in refiling is for an unduly prolonged period of 139 days, it becomes incumbent on the Bench to be satisfied with the cogency and plausibility of the reasons set forth by the Applicant to explain the delay. Coming to our analysis, we find that one of the principal explanations given for delay is that the applicants were not available for long periods of time which led to delay in review of documents. This explanation is rather airy and light-weighted as no concrete reasons have been given to explain as to why the Applicants were absent or remained unavailable for consultation for such long periods. We are of the considered view that the refiling d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the NCLAT Registry for which delay no explanation has been given at all. We are not persuaded by these bald and frivolous explanations to cover up the lack of diligence on the part of both the Applicants and their counsel in filing the appeal in a timely manner. 9. The Applicant has clearly failed to effectively demonstrate sufficient cause for condonation of delay of 139 days in refiling the appeal. 10. In view of the above, we do not see any merit in the Application filed for seeking condonation of 139 days delay in refiling the appeal. Sufficient grounds not having been made out, IA No. 8821 of 2024 is rejected. In view of the dismissal of the application for condonation of delay in refiling, the Memo of Appeal is also rejected.
Ca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates