Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, BASANT BALAJI, JJ
M/S. INNOVATE DESIGNERS & BUILDERS PVT. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. review sought due to delayed certified copy after appeal expiry. (Para 2) |
| 2. court grants appeal period extension for delayed delivery. (Para 3) |
| 3. appeal within four days deemed timely with online permission. (Para 4) |
O R D E R
Dated this the 8thday of April, 2026Devan Ramachandran, JThis petition has been filed seeking review of the judgment 24.03.2026, not because there is any error in it, but on the assertion that its certified copy was received only on 06.04.2026, within which time, the period for filing the statutory appeal had expired, on 02.04.2026.
2. We notice the judgment is dated 24.03.2026; and we were under the bonafide impression that the appellant would be able to invoke their appellate remedy on the strength of our observations therein, within the statutory period.
3. However, since the certified copy of the judgment appears to have been delivered to the appellant only on 06.04.2026, we are of the firm view that afore period must still be made available to the appellant.
4. In the afore circumstances, we allow this petition; and clarify that if the petitioner is to file a statutory appeal within a period of four working days from the date of receipt of
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
