Commercial Tax | Allahabad High Court Upholds Condonation Of 1365 Days Delay On Sufficient Cause

Upasna Agrawal

27 Jan 2024 12:15 PM GMT

  • Commercial Tax | Allahabad High Court Upholds Condonation Of 1365 Days Delay On Sufficient Cause

    The Allahabad High Court has upheld condonation of delay of 1365 days by the Commercial Tax Tribunal in filing of appeal as it was sufficiently explained by the authorities.Revisionist-assesee approached the High Court against order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal condoning the delay of 1365 days on part of the Department in filing the appeal. Reliance was placed on the decision of the...

    The Allahabad High Court has upheld condonation of delay of 1365 days by the Commercial Tax Tribunal in filing of appeal as it was sufficiently explained by the authorities.

    Revisionist-assesee approached the High Court against order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal condoning the delay of 1365 days on part of the Department in filing the appeal. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Allahabad High Court in M/s Anil Enterprises v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax, U.P. Lucknow to argue that inordinate delay cannot be condoned on wholly vague and generic grounds.

    In M/s Anil Enterprises v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax, U.P. Lucknow, the Allahabad High Court had refused to condone a delay of 530 days by relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in Postmaster General & Ors. v. Living Media India Limited and Another.

    Relying on the decision of Supreme Court in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy, counsel for department argued that the delay was condoned after considering the reasons provided for the delay.

    In N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy, the Supreme Court had held that it is the discretion of the Court to condone delay. The delay can be very small but unjustified, and very long but condonable due to satisfactory explanation. The Apex Court held that

    “Once the court accepts the explanation as sufficient, it is the result of positive exercise of discretion and normally the superior court should not disturb such finding, much less in revisional jurisdiction, unless the exercise of discretion was on wholly untenable grounds or arbitrary or perverse. But it is a different matter when the first court refuses to condone the delay. In such cases, the superior court would be free to consider the cause shown for the delay afresh and it is open to such superior court to come to its own finding even untrammelled by the conclusion of the lower court."

    The Court held that the Commercial Tax Tribunal had sufficiently explained the reasons for condoning the delay in its order. Accordingly, the revision was quashed with a direction to the Tribunal to decide the appeal within four months.

    Case Title: M/S Royal Sanitations vs. Commissioner Of Commercial Tax 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 51 [SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 302 of 2022]

    Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 51

    Click Here To Read/Download Order

    Next Story