2003 (11) TMI 13 - HC - Income Tax

Application seeking condonation of delay in filing review application - This is an application by the Revenue under section 5 of the Limitation Act 1963 read with section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking condonation of delay of about 12 months in filing the review application against the order passed by this court. By the impugned order following the decision of this court in I.T.C. No. 35 of 1999 the Revenue s appeal under section 260A was not entertained. - On the facts in hand no cause much less a sufficient cause has been made out for condonation of delay in filing the review application and we are constrained to dismiss the application.

Summary

Issues:
Delay in filing review application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code.

Analysis:
The Revenue filed an application seeking condonation of delay of "about 12 months" in filing the review application against the order passed by the High Court. The delay was attributed to the time-consuming process of obtaining opinions from multiple authorities such as the Central Board of Direct Taxes and the Ministry of Law. The timeline of events provided in the application showed significant delays in processing the file and obtaining opinions, leading to a delay of over 400 days in filing the review application.

The Revenue relied on legal precedents to argue for condonation of delay, citing the processing of files between ministries and standing counsels as reasons for the delay. However, the High Court noted that the handling of the file reflected a casual and cavalier manner, with delays at various stages. The court emphasized the need for a pragmatic approach in considering "sufficient cause" for condonation of delay, highlighting that the State should not be shielded for inaction due to apparent lethargy.

Despite recognizing the need for some latitude in cases involving the State, the High Court found that no sufficient cause had been established for condoning the delay in filing the review application. Consequently, the court dismissed the application and the review application as barred by limitation. The judgment was made without imposing any costs, considering the facts of the case.

In conclusion, the High Court's decision in this case underscores the importance of timely action and diligent handling of legal matters, especially when involving governmental authorities. The judgment serves as a reminder that while some flexibility may be allowed in certain circumstances, persistent delays and inaction cannot be justified under the guise of procedural complexities.