Hindustan Unilever Ltd v. CCE [2014]45 GST 667 (HC Gauhati)
Facts of case:
Assessee’s appeal before Tribunal was delayed by 95 days-Tribunal denied condonation of delay on ground that application was vague and date chart explaining day was not furnished
HELD:
Condoning delay always advances cause of justice and affords opportunity to parties to contest case on merits whereas; not condoning delay results in denial of justice and deprives them of opportunity – That does not mean in every case delay should always be condoned, but by and large, approach of court should not be so technical, but it should always ensure that substantial justice is done by giving an opportunity of being heard to both parties – Hence ,Tribunal should have condoned delay because: (a) delay was of 95 days (b) ground of delay stated in application was’ sufficient cause’ – Accordingly ,delay was condoned and matter was remanded to Tribunal
No comments:
Post a Comment