Statutory Appeal Period Under Customs Act, Appellate Authority Has No Power To Condone Delay: Delhi High Court
1 year, 5 months ago

Statutory Appeal Period Under Customs Act, Appellate Authority Has No Power To Condone Delay: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has held that the appellate authority has no power to allow the appeal to be presented beyond the period of 30 days.The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Dharmesh Sharma has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur & Ors., in which it was held that the legislature intended. The Delhi High Court has held that the appellate authority has no power to allow the appeal to be presented beyond the period of 30 days. The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Dharmesh Sharma has relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur & Ors., in which it was held that the legislature intended the appellate authority to entertain the appeal by condoning delay only up to 30 days after the expiry of 60 days, which is the normal period for preferring an appeal. The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal has taken note of the language employed in that provision to hold that the appeal could have been preferred within the maximum period of 90 days.

Appeal Court Customs Delhi High Court Period Commissioner 30 Days Stat No Power Central Excise 60 Days Section 5 Of Cestat Singh Enterprises  30  limitation  held  customs  condone  appeal  authority  commissioner  days  period  court  presented  delay  statutory  excise  delhi  power  high

History of this topic

Time Spent Before 'Wrong' Court Excluded U/S 14 Of Limitation Act While Calculating Limitation Period U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
2 weeks, 4 days ago

Time Spent Before 'Wrong' Court Excluded U/S 14 Of Limitation Act While Calculating Limitation Period U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma has held that during the calculation of the limitation period of three months for the application under Section 34 of the Act, the time during which the applicant was prosecuting such application before the wrong court is excluded. Brief Facts of the case: The appellant has filed an appeal under Section …

Delhi HC junks plea against 30-year-old order acquitting 16 in 1984 riots case
2 weeks, 4 days ago

Delhi HC junks plea against 30-year-old order acquitting 16 in 1984 riots case

Hindustan Times  

The Delhi high court has refused to accept an appeal put forward by the Delhi Police against a 30-year-old city court’s order to acquit 16 people in connection with a case stemming from the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. While this court is conscious of the large-scale quantum of human lives and property during the 1984 riots, after having seen the quantum …

Limitation Period For Filing Appeal U/S 61 Of IBC Commences From Date Of Order, Not From Date Of Its Receipt: NCLAT
3 weeks, 4 days ago

Limitation Period For Filing Appeal U/S 61 Of IBC Commences From Date Of Order, Not From Date Of Its Receipt: NCLAT

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan, Mr. Barun Mitra and Mr. Arun Baroka has held that the limitation period for filing an appeal under section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 shall commence from the date of passing of the order and not from the date when a copy of the …

Limitation For Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act Is Governed By Article 116 Of Limitation Act, Delay Not To Be Condoned In Mechanical Manner: Bombay HC
1 month, 1 week ago

Limitation For Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act Is Governed By Article 116 Of Limitation Act, Delay Not To Be Condoned In Mechanical Manner: Bombay HC

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has held that the delay in filing an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 should not be condoned in a mechanical manner as it would defeat the very objective of the Arbitration Act which is to provide a speedy resolution of disputes. It also held that as …

Limitation Act Doesn't Apply To Appeals Preferred Before Collector Under Section 70 Of Chit Funds Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court
1 month, 1 week ago

Limitation Act Doesn't Apply To Appeals Preferred Before Collector Under Section 70 Of Chit Funds Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court

Live Law  

Andhra Pradesh High Court has clarified that the Limitation Act does not apply to Section 70 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982 which stipulates that an appeal against the order passed by the Deputy Registrar of Chits should be filed with 2 months. But, any specific power has not been conferred to the appellate authority under Section 70 of the …

S.107 CGST Act Prescribes Independent Regime Of Limitation For Filing Appeals, Application Of S.5 Limitation Act Stands Excluded: Delhi HC
1 month, 1 week ago

S.107 CGST Act Prescribes Independent Regime Of Limitation For Filing Appeals, Application Of S.5 Limitation Act Stands Excluded: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has held that since Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 prescribes an “independent regime” to determine the limitation period for filing statutory appeals, the provision for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act stands excluded. Once it is found that the legislation incorporates a provision which creates a …

Not An Enabling Provision, Proscribes Reassessment Action Beyond Limitation: Delhi HC Explains Timelines U/S 149 Of Income Tax Act
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Not An Enabling Provision, Proscribes Reassessment Action Beyond Limitation: Delhi HC Explains Timelines U/S 149 Of Income Tax Act

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, which prescribes a limitation period for initiating reassessment against an assessee, is not an enabling provision but rather a proscription on the Assessing Officer's powers. The Court illustrated “If the show cause notice under Section 148A of the Act is issued to an assessee, …

Prescribed Time Limit For Filing Refund Application Cannot Be Disregarded Merely Because Tax Was Collected Without Legal Authority: CESTAT
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Prescribed Time Limit For Filing Refund Application Cannot Be Disregarded Merely Because Tax Was Collected Without Legal Authority: CESTAT

Live Law  

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal has stated that the prescribed time limit for filing a refund application cannot be disregarded merely because the tax was collected without legal authority. The Bench of Justices Dilip Gupta and P. V. Subba Rao has observed that “the appellant cannot be permitted to claim a refund of …

Department Cannot Invoke Extended Period Of Limitation Merely Because Returns Were Self-Assessed: CESTAT
Trending News
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Department Cannot Invoke Extended Period Of Limitation Merely Because Returns Were Self-Assessed: CESTAT

Live Law  

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal has stated that the department cannot invoke the extended period of limitation merely because the returns were self-assessed. The suppression has to be with an intent to evade payment of service tax and for this purpose the show cause notice must specifically allege why the asseessee has suppressed …

Time Spent To Defend Reassessment Notice Issued Without Following Procedure Doesn't Extend Limitation For Revenue When Issuing Fresh Notice: Delhi HC
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Time Spent To Defend Reassessment Notice Issued Without Following Procedure Doesn't Extend Limitation For Revenue When Issuing Fresh Notice: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has held that if the Revenue issues a reassessment notice to an assessee under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without following due procedure, it cannot later issue fresh reassessment notice beyond the prescribed period, claiming that time spent on earlier litigation is to be excluded for the purposes of computing limitation. A division …

Delay Beyond 15 Days In Filing Appeal Cannot Be Condoned As Per Proviso To Section 61(2) Of IBC: NCLAT
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Delay Beyond 15 Days In Filing Appeal Cannot Be Condoned As Per Proviso To Section 61(2) Of IBC: NCLAT

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan, Mr. Barun Mita and Mr. Arun Baroka has held that delay in filing an appeal beyond 15 days as per section 61 proviso of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code cannot be condoned. The appellant submitted that the appeal has been filed within a period of limitation that is within 45 days …

Briefing Standing Counsel, Obtaining Approvals From Officials Not 'Sufficient Cause' For Condoning Delay In Filing Appeal: Delhi High Court
2 months ago

Briefing Standing Counsel, Obtaining Approvals From Officials Not 'Sufficient Cause' For Condoning Delay In Filing Appeal: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

While rejecting an appeal moved by Delhi Government's Directorate of Education, the Delhi High Court has ruled that obtaining approvals from officials of its departments and briefing the standing counsel are not “sufficient cause” for application of condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. “In any event, in our considered view the aforesaid plea taken by the …

S.42 PLMA Excludes Applicability Of Section 5 Limitation Act, Delay In Filing Appeal Cannot Be Condoned Beyond 120 Days: Bombay High Court
2 months ago

S.42 PLMA Excludes Applicability Of Section 5 Limitation Act, Delay In Filing Appeal Cannot Be Condoned Beyond 120 Days: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has held that a delay in filing an appeal under Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 cannot be condoned by the High Court beyond 120 days as stipulated in the provision. A division bench of Justice B. P. Colabawalla and Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan stated that Section 42 PMLA excludes the applicability of …

166 Days Delay In Re-Filing Appeal Cannot Be Condoned In Absence Of Genuine And Plausible Explanation: NCLAT
2 months, 1 week ago

166 Days Delay In Re-Filing Appeal Cannot Be Condoned In Absence Of Genuine And Plausible Explanation: NCLAT

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Barun Mitra has held that a delay of 166 in re-filing an appeal cannot be condoned in the absence of a plausible and genuine explanation offered for the same. No.6903 of 2024 is an application praying for condonation of 166 days delay in refiling an appeal. When the Appeal …

Limitation Period To Reset When Part-Payment Of Debt Is Made By Personal Guarantor U/S 19 Of Limitation Act: NCLT Delhi
2 months, 1 week ago

Limitation Period To Reset When Part-Payment Of Debt Is Made By Personal Guarantor U/S 19 Of Limitation Act: NCLT Delhi

Live Law  

The National Company Law Tribunal Delhi comprising of Justice Subrata Kumar Dash and Justice Ashok Kumar Bhardwaj dismissed an appeal filed by the personal guarantors of the principal debtor M/s VCRM Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. stating that the appeal falls within the ambit of limitation period as prescribed under Section 19 of Limitation act, 1963 and that the Liquidator can institute …

[LARR Act, 2013] Court Cannot Condone Delay Beyond 120-Day Period In Appeal Against Award Of Compensation: Bombay High Court
2 months, 2 weeks ago

[LARR Act, 2013] Court Cannot Condone Delay Beyond 120-Day Period In Appeal Against Award Of Compensation: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has observed that a delay in filing an appeal against the award of compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 cannot be condoned by the court beyond a period of 120 days as provided under Section 74 of the Act. The Court stated that as Section …

Commissioner Cannot Use Its Power U/S 107(2) CGST Act To Review Order Passed By Appellate Authority: Delhi High Court
2 months, 2 weeks ago

Commissioner Cannot Use Its Power U/S 107(2) CGST Act To Review Order Passed By Appellate Authority: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a Commissioner under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 cannot, in purported exercise of its powers under Section 107, sit in appeal over an order passed by the Appellate Authority. A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Dharmesh Sharma ruled, “The Commissioner, while seeking to review an order …

Delay In Filing Certified Copy Of Impugned Order Doesn't Render Appeal Filed Electronically U/S 107 CGST Act Time-Barred: Delhi HC
2 months, 2 weeks ago

Delay In Filing Certified Copy Of Impugned Order Doesn't Render Appeal Filed Electronically U/S 107 CGST Act Time-Barred: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has held that delay in filing certified copy of impugned order in an appeal preferred by Assessee under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 would not render the appeal time-barred, if it was filed online within prescribed time. Thereafter, under Rule 108 of CGST Rules, certified copy of the decision could …

National Investigation Agency Act | High Court Can't Condone Delay In Filing Appeal Beyond 90 Days, S.21(5) Mandatory: Punjab & Haryana HC
2 months, 3 weeks ago

National Investigation Agency Act | High Court Can't Condone Delay In Filing Appeal Beyond 90 Days, S.21(5) Mandatory: Punjab & Haryana HC

Live Law  

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the High Court is not empowered to condone delay in filing appeal under National Investigation Agency Act beyond 90 days and provision of Section 21 is "mandatory" in nature. Courts creating distinction between appellant under Section 21 of the NIA Act for condoning the delay in preferring an appeal, would absolutely …

National Investigation Agency Act | High Court Can't Condone Delay In Filing Appeal Beyond 90 Days, S.21(5) Mandatory: Punjab & Haryana HC
2 months, 3 weeks ago

National Investigation Agency Act | High Court Can't Condone Delay In Filing Appeal Beyond 90 Days, S.21(5) Mandatory: Punjab & Haryana HC

Live Law  

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the High Court is not empowered to condone delay in filing appeal under National Investigation Agency Act beyond 90 days and provision of Section 21 is "mandatory" in nature. Courts creating distinction between appellant under Section 21 of the NIA Act for condoning the delay in preferring an appeal, would absolutely …

Order Rejecting Plea For Extension Of Investigation Period From Initial 90 To 180 Days Under UAPA Appealable, Not Interlocutory: Delhi HC
3 months ago

Order Rejecting Plea For Extension Of Investigation Period From Initial 90 To 180 Days Under UAPA Appealable, Not Interlocutory: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has recently held that an order rejecting the application for extension of period of investigation from initial 90 to 180 days under Section 43D of UAPA is an appealable order and not an interlocutory order. A division bench comprising of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Amit Sharma said that the finality attached to such an …

Sufficiency Of Reasons Over Number Of Days Is Considered While Determining Plea Of Condonation Of Delay U/S 37(1)(2) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC
3 months ago

Sufficiency Of Reasons Over Number Of Days Is Considered While Determining Plea Of Condonation Of Delay U/S 37(1)(2) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee held that the appellant failed to demonstrate any plausible reasons for the delay caused in filing the present appeal. The appeal was also accompanied by two applications, the first seeking condonation of 670 days delay in filing the appeal and the second 591 days delay in re-filing …

Court Can Quash SCNs And Proceedings Under GST Act, Customs Act Or Finance Act On Ground Of Inordinate Delay In Adjudication: Delhi HC
3 months, 1 week ago

Court Can Quash SCNs And Proceedings Under GST Act, Customs Act Or Finance Act On Ground Of Inordinate Delay In Adjudication: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that Show Cause Notices and adjudication proceedings under the Customs Act, 1962, the Finance Act, 1994 or the Central Goods and Services Tax, 2017 cannot be kept pending for years. Court said the phrase cannot be construed as a free-pass and “Ultimately it is incumbent upon the authority to establish that it …

S. 14 Limitation Act Applicable To Arbitration & Conciliation Act : Supreme Court
3 months, 1 week ago

S. 14 Limitation Act Applicable To Arbitration & Conciliation Act : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has held that Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is applicable to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.Section 14 of the Limitation Act provides for the exclusion of the time spent in pursuing bona fide proceedings in a wrong forum from the computation of the period of limitation.A bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Manoj …

Not Being Aware Of Legal Remedy Not Ground To Condone Delay: Punjab & Haryana High Court
3 months, 2 weeks ago

Not Being Aware Of Legal Remedy Not Ground To Condone Delay: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Live Law  

"It is the duty of all Courts of justice, to take care for the general good of the community, that hard cases do not make bad law,” quoted the Punjab & Haryana High Court while refusing to allow plea for condonation of delay filed asserting lack of proper legal advice.Justice Sumeet Goel said, "A mere bald assertion of not having …

Special Treatment Cannot Be Given To Govt For Delay In Filing Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Special Treatment Cannot Be Given To Govt For Delay In Filing Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Ms. Justice Rekha Palli and Mr. Justice Saurabh Banerjee has affirmed that just because the appellant is government that doesn't mean that a special treatment will be given while condoning the delay in filing the appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration Act. That In M/s Jaitely Construction Co. v. Union of India the …

Liberty To File Fresh Application Not Fresh Cause Of Action, Limitation U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Extended: Delhi High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Liberty To File Fresh Application Not Fresh Cause Of Action, Limitation U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Extended: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee have held that mere liberty to file a fresh application before the competent Court does not amount to a fresh cause of action occurring in the appellant's favour. The relevant date of the Award always remained unchanged, and therefore even after availing the benefit of the period …

Time Spent In Bona Fide Proceedings Before Court Without Jurisdiction To Be Excluded When Considering Objection On Limitation In S.11 Plea: Delhi HC
4 months, 1 week ago

Time Spent In Bona Fide Proceedings Before Court Without Jurisdiction To Be Excluded When Considering Objection On Limitation In S.11 Plea: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench comprising of Justice Subramonium Prasad, while hearing a Section 11 petition, has held that the petitioner's claim cannot be treated as dead one simply because they spent time on bona fide court proceedings before a court without jurisdiction. The petitioner then filed an application under Section 12 of the Commercial Court Act for pre-litigation mediation …

Scope Of Review U/S 37 Is Limited To Ascertaining Compliance With S. 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
4 months, 1 week ago

Scope Of Review U/S 37 Is Limited To Ascertaining Compliance With S. 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Rekha Palli and Saurabh Banerjee affirmed that the Court under section 37 of the Arbitration Act cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award, and must only ascertain that the exercise of power by the Court under Section 34 has not exceeded the scope of the provision Brief Facts The …

NIA Act | High Courts Cannot Expand Scope Of Interpretation, Condone Delay Beyond Permissible Limit: Madras High Court
4 months, 1 week ago

NIA Act | High Courts Cannot Expand Scope Of Interpretation, Condone Delay Beyond Permissible Limit: Madras High Court

Live Law  

The Madras High Court recently held that the High Court was not empowered to condone the delay in filing an appeal under the National Investigating Agency Act 2008 beyond the permissible limit. The court added that the language employed in the provision under the NIA Act was unambiguous and thus the courts could not condone the delay beyond the permissible …

NCLAT Rejects One-Day Delay in Filing Appeal Against NCLT Order: Appellate of Order Dated 03.07.2024
4 months, 3 weeks ago

NCLAT Rejects One-Day Delay in Filing Appeal Against NCLT Order: Appellate of Order Dated 03.07.2024

Live Law  

The NCLAT has ruled in favor of the appellants in the case involving a delay in filing an appeal against an order of the NCLT. The court held that the limitation for condonation of a delay starts from the date of pronouncement of the order, and not from the date of uploading the order on the website of the NCLT.

Petitions U/S 482 CrPC Filed With Delay Or To Overcome Expired Limitation Of Alternate Remedy Cannot Be Entertained: Delhi High Court
8 months ago

Petitions U/S 482 CrPC Filed With Delay Or To Overcome Expired Limitation Of Alternate Remedy Cannot Be Entertained: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has observed that failure to avail alternate remedy on the ground of ongoing settlement process is not a reason for the court to exercise its discretionary power to quash the complaint cases. where it is filed with unexplained delay and laches and in the meantime, the trial has proceeded.” It referred to the Supreme Court case …

S. 4 Limitation Act Can't Be Invoked Using 30-Day Extension For Arbitration Appeals Filed Beyond 3-Months From Award: Supreme Court
8 months, 1 week ago

S. 4 Limitation Act Can't Be Invoked Using 30-Day Extension For Arbitration Appeals Filed Beyond 3-Months From Award: Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court reiterated that if an arbitral award is challenged beyond the three-month limitation, the benefit of section 4 of the Limitation Act will not be available. The Court held that the 30-day extension period mentioned in the proviso to Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 cannot be included in the "prescribed period" in Section 4 …

[Arbitration Act] General Explanation Of Intra-departmental Analysis And Discussions Doesn't Constitute Credible Explanation For Delay In Filing Appeal: Delhi High Court
9 months, 2 weeks ago

[Arbitration Act] General Explanation Of Intra-departmental Analysis And Discussions Doesn't Constitute Credible Explanation For Delay In Filing Appeal: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju held that a general explanation of intra-departmental analysis and discussions doesn't constitute as valid and credible explanation for condonation of delay in filing an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Brief Facts: The Appellant approached the Delhi High Court and filed …

S.5 Limitation Act Does Not Apply To Application U/S 34 Arbitration Act, Timeline Provided To Be Adhered Strictly: Allahabad High Court
10 months ago

S.5 Limitation Act Does Not Apply To Application U/S 34 Arbitration Act, Timeline Provided To Be Adhered Strictly: Allahabad High Court

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court has held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the timeline provided in Section 34 for challenging an arbitral award must be strictly adhered to. Proviso to Section 34 empowers Court to condone a delay of 30 days if sufficient …

Delhi VAT Act | Authorities Must Strictly Follow Time Limit To Process & Issue Refunds : Supreme Court
10 months, 2 weeks ago

Delhi VAT Act | Authorities Must Strictly Follow Time Limit To Process & Issue Refunds : Supreme Court

Live Law  

In a recent decision, the Supreme Court held that the department must mandatorily adhere to the time limit for processing and issuing the refunds under Section 38 of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004. “The language of Section 38 is mandatory and the department must adhere to the timeline stipulated therein to fulfill the object of the provision, which …

Is 90-Day Limitation For Appeal Under Sec.21(5) NIA Act Directory Or Mandatory? Supreme Court To Settle Conflicting Views Of HCs
11 months, 2 weeks ago

Is 90-Day Limitation For Appeal Under Sec.21(5) NIA Act Directory Or Mandatory? Supreme Court To Settle Conflicting Views Of HCs

Live Law  

The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to decide the issue whether the upper limit of 90 days prescribed under Section 21 National Investigation Agency Act to file appeal against an order of the trial court is directory or mandatory.The Court noted that there are conflicting opinions rendered by the High Courts on this point.The bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud …

Allahabad High Court Directs Inquiry Against Officers Who Failed To File Arbitration Appeals Within Prescribed Limitation
11 months, 3 weeks ago

Allahabad High Court Directs Inquiry Against Officers Who Failed To File Arbitration Appeals Within Prescribed Limitation

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court has directed Principal Secretary/Additional Chief Secretary, Irrigation, Uttar Pradesh to conduct an inquiry against officers who were responsible for filing appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 which were filed after a delay of 513 days. While dismissing the appeals filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the …

Application Under Section 29A A&C Can Be Allowed Even After Expiry Of Arbitral Tribunal's Mandate: Delhi High Court
11 months, 3 weeks ago

Application Under Section 29A A&C Can Be Allowed Even After Expiry Of Arbitral Tribunal's Mandate: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh held that the application under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can be allowed even after the expiry of the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal. Brief Facts: The Petitioner approached the Delhi High Court seeking extension of time for completion of the arbitration proceedings. Observations by the …

Limitation Act | Doesn't Encompass Long Delays, Condonation Only In Exceptional Cases: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Section 37 A&C Petition
1 year ago

Limitation Act | Doesn't Encompass Long Delays, Condonation Only In Exceptional Cases: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Section 37 A&C Petition

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court single bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not encompass long delays, and condonation can only be granted in exceptional cases where the appellant acted in a bona fide manner and not negligently. Furthermore, the High Court emphasized the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act to …

S.5 Limitation Act Applies To Rectification Of Orders U/S 31 Of UP VAT Act: Allahabad High Court
1 year ago

S.5 Limitation Act Applies To Rectification Of Orders U/S 31 Of UP VAT Act: Allahabad High Court

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court has held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act will apply to rectification of orders passed by officer, authority, Tribunal or the High Court under Section 31 of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008. Section 31 of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008 provides that any officer, authority, Tribunal or the High …

[LARR Act, 2013] Kerala High Court Declines To Condone Delay In Filing Appeal After Expiry Of Maximum Period Of 120 Days
1 year ago

[LARR Act, 2013] Kerala High Court Declines To Condone Delay In Filing Appeal After Expiry Of Maximum Period Of 120 Days

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court has stated that the maximum time period for filing an appeal against an award as per Section 74 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act, 2013 is 120 days. The Division Bench comprising Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen while declining to condone the delay in …

Delay Occurred In Filing Appeal Against Acquittal Under S.378 CrPC Can Be Condoned Under Limitation Act: Supreme Court
1 year, 1 month ago

Delay Occurred In Filing Appeal Against Acquittal Under S.378 CrPC Can Be Condoned Under Limitation Act: Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court held that the delay that occurred in preferring an appeal against the acquittal can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Arguments Made by the Parties The appellant-accused contended that the High Court could not have allowed the delay condonation application as the delay occurred in filing the appeal against the acquittal cannot be …

Period Spent In Disposal Of Appeal Before CESTAT Shall Not Be Counted Towards Period Stipulated Under Section 28 (9) Of Customs Act: Delhi High Court
1 year, 1 month ago

Period Spent In Disposal Of Appeal Before CESTAT Shall Not Be Counted Towards Period Stipulated Under Section 28 (9) Of Customs Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has held that the period spent in the disposal of the appeal before the CESTAT, i.e., between the filing and the final order being passed, shall not be counted towards the period stipulated under Section 28 of the Customs Act.The bench of Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Ravinder Dudeja has observed that the Tribunal has already …

Sluggishness Intolerable: Calcutta High Court Slams CBI's Conduct For Failing To File Appeal Within Limitation Period
1 year, 1 month ago

Sluggishness Intolerable: Calcutta High Court Slams CBI's Conduct For Failing To File Appeal Within Limitation Period

Live Law  

The Calcutta High Court has heavily criticized the conduct of the Central Bureau of Investigation and its Director for failing to file an appeal within the statutory period of limitation.A single bench of Justice Bibhas Ranjan De, in a plea for condonation of delay in filing the special leave to appeal, allowed delayed filing in the interest of justice and …

Section 11 Petition Can Be Filed Only After Failure Of Parties To Appoint Arbitrator Within 30 Days Of Notice, Limitation Act Applies: Delhi High Court
1 year, 1 month ago

Section 11 Petition Can Be Filed Only After Failure Of Parties To Appoint Arbitrator Within 30 Days Of Notice, Limitation Act Applies: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench, comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh, held that a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can only be filed after a notice of arbitration has been issued and there has been a failure to make the appointment of an arbitrator within 30 days. The bench held that the limitation period arises …

Extension Of Limitation Period Under Section 168A Of GST Act; Punjab And Haryana High Court Issues Notice
1 year, 2 months ago

Extension Of Limitation Period Under Section 168A Of GST Act; Punjab And Haryana High Court Issues Notice

Live Law  

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a notice to the government in a plea challenging the extension of the limitation period under Section 168A of the GST Act.The bench of Justice G.S. The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a notice to the government in a plea challenging the extension of the limitation period under Section 168A …

Limitation Period For Appointment Of A Substitute Arbitrator Is 3 Years From The Date When The Right To Apply For Fresh Appointment Accrues: Delhi High Court
1 year, 2 months ago

Limitation Period For Appointment Of A Substitute Arbitrator Is 3 Years From The Date When The Right To Apply For Fresh Appointment Accrues: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi has held that the limitation period for the appointment of the substitute arbitrator is 3 years from the date when the right to apply for such appointment accrues. The bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh held that since the act does not provide for any explicit period for the appointment of a substitute arbitrator, the …

Supreme Court Surprised At 4-Year Delay By Income Tax Department In Filing Appeals; Asks About Action Against Officials
1 year, 2 months ago

Supreme Court Surprised At 4-Year Delay By Income Tax Department In Filing Appeals; Asks About Action Against Officials

Live Law  

Taking serious note of the gross delay of over four years on the part of the Income Tax Department in filing statutory appeals before the High Court, the Supreme Court has called for an affidavit from the concerned officer to explain the inquiry made and action taken regarding the delay. ".we direct that the concerned authority to file an affidavit …

Under Section 34(3) Of The A&C Act, The Limitation Period Of 3 Months Plus 30 Days In Inelastic And Inflexible: Delhi High Court Reiterates
1 year, 2 months ago

Under Section 34(3) Of The A&C Act, The Limitation Period Of 3 Months Plus 30 Days In Inelastic And Inflexible: Delhi High Court Reiterates

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi has held that under Section 34 of the A&C Act, the limitation period of 3 months plus 30 days in inelastic and inflexible. The bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna explained that the challenge petition must be filed within 3 months from the date of the receiving of the award, however, …

Discover Related