New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (6) TMI 14 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

2015 (6) TMI 14 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT - 2015 (39) S.T.R. 986 (P & H) - Restoration of appeal - Dismissal of the applications of the appellants for extension of time to deposit the amounts as a condition precedent to the maintainability of the appeal - Held that:- There was a delay of only 7 days in complying with the orders requiring the appellants to deposit the amounts. The application for extension of time filed on 22.04.2013 and the application for restoration were, however, dismisse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s such as these viz. to grant an extension of time to deposit an amount or to restore appeals dismissed on account of the failure to comply with the orders of pre-deposit. - Appeal restored. - STA No. 7 of 2015 (O & M) and C.M. No. 10874-CII of 2015 - Dated:- 26-5-2015 - MR. S.J. VAZIFDAR AND MR. G.S.SANDHAWALIA, JJ. Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate, for the appellant Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Advocate, for the respondent JUDGEMENT S.J. VAZIFDAR, A.C.J. (Oral) C.M. No. 10874-CII of 2015 Application for placi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s of the case, rejection of the application for restoration of the appeal by the Learned Tribunal was justified in law? ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the delay of 4 days to deposit the amount of pre-deposit owing the financial hardship faced by Appellant was justified in law and condonable? The appellants had filed an appeal before the CESTAT against an order of the Commissioner raising a demand of about ₹ 58 lacs. The merits of the demand are not relevant for the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er order dated 15.04.2013, the time to deposit the amounts was extended upto 20.04.2013. On 22.04.2013, the appellant filed an application for a further extension. The appellants had failed to deposit the aforesaid amounts. On 22.04.2013, the appeal itself was dismissed for noncompliance of the aforesaid orders requiring the appellants to deposit the said amounts. At that stage, the last application for extension filed on 22.04.2013 had not been decided. As we mentioned earlier, the last date fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

09.2013 impugned in this appeal. We do not see any reason to deny the appellants an extension of a mere 7 days. It would be grossly inequitable and unfair to deny the appellants an opportunity of having their case heard on merits on account of their having delayed in complying with the order by just 7 days. The application for extension dated 22.04.2013 was pending when the appeal was dismissed on 23.04.2013 for non-compliance with the said orders. They could not have deposited the amounts on th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version