Case Law Details
S/S Patel Hardware Vs Commissioner (Allahabad High Court)
Keeping in mind the fact that the delay in filing the appeal may not be condoned beyond the period of one month from the expiry of period of limitation, the phrase “communicated to such person” appearing in Section 107(1) of the Act commend a construction that would imply that the order be necessarily brought to the knowledge of the person who is likely to be aggrieved. Unless such construction is offered, the right of appeal would itself be lost though a delay of more than a month would in all such cases be such as may itself not warrant such strict construction.
In the facts of the present case as well it is seen that it is largely undisputed that the impugned penalty order was served on the driver of the truck while the penalty order is directed against the owner of the goods. Therefore, for that reason also it may be accepted that the penalty order had not been communicated to the petitioner prior to the date 25.05.2018.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
1. First supplementary affidavit filed today. The same is taken on record.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
