2020 (10) TMI 298 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Condonation of delay in filing second appeal - no sufficient cause shown for delay - HELD THAT - The delay is to an extent of 329 days. The reason assigned is that the copy of the impugned order was served to the junior staff of the senior advocate for further course of action by the authorized representative of the assessee. Thereafter, the file went missing. Later on, when the representative of the company intended to know what has happened to the matter, then they searched the file and it was found - there are no reason to disbelieve the affidavit filed. The assessee is a joint stock company and is involved in various activities. Therefore, it cannot be said that the reason assigned by them does not constitute sufficient cause. On considering the reasons, the explanation offered by the assessee-company constitutes sufficient cause. Hon ble Supreme Court have held in a catena of judgments that the delay should not come in the way of doing substantial justice between the parties. Revision disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Delay in filing second appeal before the tribunal for different assessment years.

Analysis:
The High Court considered two revisions related to the same assessee for different assessment years. The only contention raised was regarding the delay in filing the second appeal before the tribunal. The senior counsel for the revisionist argued that there was a delay due to certain reasons, including misplacement of the file after it was served to the junior staff. The tribunal had dismissed the application for condonation of delay, leading to the filing of these revisions raising substantial questions of law.

The senior counsel explained that the delay occurred as the copy of the impugned order was served to the junior staff, and the file was misplaced, causing the delay of 329 days. The court found the reasons provided by the assessee to be satisfactory, especially considering the nature of the company's activities and the subsequent retrieval of the file. The court emphasized that the delay should not prevent substantial justice between the parties, citing previous judgments by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the application seeking condonation of delay, setting aside the tribunal's order and remitting the matter back to the tribunal for consideration on merits. Both revisions were disposed of accordingly, with any pending applications also being disposed of by the court.