SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

SC holds influencers, celebrities equally accountable for misleading adsGST - Appellate Authority has not noticed the provisions of Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 which mandates that the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced, is also to be excluded: HCKejriwal’s judicial custody extended till May 20GST - If the Proper Officer was of the view that the reply filed was insufficient, he could have sought more clarification - Without providing any such opportunity, impugned order could not have been passed - Matter remanded: HCGST - Notice requiring petitioner to furnish additional information/clarification does not mention that petitioner had to appear for personal hearing - Since no opportunity of personal hearing was given, order is unsustainable: HCGST - For the purposes of DNB and FNB courses, petitioner clearly falls within the scope of an educational institution imparting education to students enrolled with it as a part of a curriculum - Services exempted: HCGST - Candidates appearing for the screening tests are not students of the petitioner - Petitioner's claim of exemption on such examination fees is unmerited: HCGST - NEET examinations are in the nature of an entrance examination - Petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of an exemption by virtue of Serial No.66(aa) of the 2017 Notification, which came into effect on 25.01.2018: HCBrisk voting reported from all 96 LS seats; PM casts vote in AhmedabadIndia calls back half of troops stationed at MaldivesIndia-Australia DTAA: Economic Statecraft through TaxRBI alerts against misuse of banking channels for facilitating illegal forex tradingTime Limit to file Appeal in GST Appellate TribunalEC censures Jagan Reddy & Chandrababu Naidu for MCC violationsFrance tells Xi Jinping EU needs protection from China’s cheap importsI-T- Addition cannot be made merely for reason that assessee got property transferred through registered sale without making payment to vendor: ITATI-T- Addition which is not based on the reasons for reopening is un-sustainable sans notice u/s 148 of the ACT: ITATOxygen valve malfunction delays launch of Boeing’s first crewed spacecraftFM administers Oath to Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra as first President of GST TribunalGhana agrees to activate UPI links in 6 monthsED seizes about 20 kg gold from locker of a cyber scammer in Haryana
 
CX - Utter negligence - Non-compliance of procedural formalities - though being largest litigant, Dept. has not engaged services of court clerks - even panel advocates do not have own paraphernalia - Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution: HC

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, JAN 13, 2017: THE CCE, Pune-III had challenged the order of the CESTAT dated 18.04.2013 by lodging an appeal, albeit belatedly, in the High Court Registry on 02.04.2014.

The Registry granted sufficient time to the Revenue to remove the office objections and get the appeal registered but no steps were taken for complying with all the procedural formalities and removing the objections.

Therefore, by a conditional order, the appeal was dismissed for want of removal of office objections.

Later, the High Court, granting enough latitude, condoned the delay in filing the appeal, but the office objections were not complied.

Finally, the appeal was dismissed for non-removal of office objections on 20th April 2016.

No steps were taken to have that order set aside and promptly.

Now, a Notice of Motion has been moved to set aside a conditional order of the Prothonotary & Senior Master.

The affidavit-in-support mentions that the Registry dismissed this appeal for want of compliance with procedural formalities.

The High Court observed -

+ Waking up after more than two and half years after such a dismissal and seeking restoration of the appeal would not be fair and proper. It is clear that there is no cause shown, much less some change in the panel of advocates. No details are provided and a vague statement is made in the affidavit-in-support.

+ It is noticed on several occasions by this Court that the advocates employ registered clerks who keep track of such matters and which remain pending in the Registry for compliance with the procedural rules.

+ The Revenue / Department has not learnt its lessons and though being the largest litigant, has not engaged the services of court clerks, much less registered court clerks. Therefore, those advocates who are engaged by the Revenue on more occasions than one have not been informed about lack of the procedural compliances.

+ The advocates who are panel advocates also do not have their own paraphernalia including clerks. We do not think that the High Court should condone such lapses and utter negligence on the part of the Revenue officials and their advocates.

Holding that the delay of 776 days remains unexplained and the cause shown is not bona fide and reasonable, the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.

As a result, the Notice of Motion is also dismissed.

(See 2017-TIOL-84-HC-MUM-CX)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.

TOP NEWS

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST