9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 847X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were handed over to the Counsel’s clerk, the documents were not traceable in the intervening period and thereafter when the documents were finally traced, the appeal was filed. We wonder whether the appellant would have taken a similar stand and the position where there are criminal or other civil proceedings against him. Would he had waited for such a long time to reach out to his Counsel again after handing over the papers initially and waited for his Counsel to file appeal on his behalf. In our considered view, the action or rather inaction on part of the appellant shows clear gross negligence in not taking the necessary steps in filing the subject appeal in time and the same cannot be accepted. In such a case, the appellant has no legal right to expect a liberal approach from us in condoning the delay notwithstanding the merits, if any in the matter. - ITA No.107/LKW/2015 - - - Dated:- 14-8-2015 - SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA, JJ. For The Appellant : Dr. C. Tiwari, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri. Sanjay Kumar, CIT (D. R.) ORDER PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: This appeal is preferred by the appellant against the order dated 29.04.2008 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 14. ..... The evidence on record suggests neglect of its own right for long time in preferring appeals. The court cannot enquire into belated and stale claims on the ground of equity. Delay defeats equity. The court helps those who are vigilant and do not slumber over their rights . 16 it is true that a party is entitled to wait until the last day of limitation for filing an appeal. But when it allows limitation to expire and pleads sufficient cause for not filing the appeal earlier, the sufficient cause must establish that because of some event or circumstance arising before the limitation period expired, it was not possible to file the appeal within time. No event or circumstance arising after the expiry of limitation can constitute sufficient cause. In Para 23, 24 and 25 of its order, the Supreme Court further held: 23. It needs no restatement at our hands that the object for fixing time-limit for litigation is based on public policy fixing a lifespan for legal remedy for the purpose of general welfare. They are meant to see that the parties do not resort to dilatory tactics but avail their legal remedies promptly. Salmond in his Jurisprudence states that the laws c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able degree of procedural red-tape in the process. The government departments are under a special obligation to ensure that they perform their duties with diligence and commitment. Condonation of delay is an exception and should not be used as an anticipated benefit for government departments. The law shelters everyone under the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a few. Considering the fact that there was no proper explanation offered by the Department for the delay except mentioning of various dates, according to us, the Department has miserably failed to give any acceptable and cogent reasons sufficient to condone such a huge delay. Accordingly, the appeals are liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay. 6. Now coming to the facts of the instant case, it is noted that the appellant in his condonation application as well as affidavit has stated that he had received the CIT s order dated 29.4.2008 whereby the CIT had denied the exemption under section 80G of the Act and the said order was received by the appellant on 9.05.2008. Further, he has stated that he was aware that the appeal against the said order was due for filing before the Appellate Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is also unclear what actions/steps appellant had taken in the intervening period i. E. after he had met his Counsel s clerk and left initially, and when he came back to meet his Counsel on 2.2.2015. The question is whether the so called reasons as stated above are reasons sufficient enough to show sufficient cause on part of the appellant to seek condonation of delay in filing the subject appeal. 9. Firstly, the facts as enumerated above clearly show appellant s neglect of its own right for a long time in preferring appeals. In such a case, then it cannot be expected from us to inquire into belated and stale claims on the ground of equity. We respectfully follow the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil (supra) wherein it was held that the evidence on record suggests neglect of its own right for a long time in preferring the appeals, then the settled rights cannot be lightly interfered with by condoning inordinate delay without there being any proper explanation of such delay. 10. Secondly, the onus is on the appellant to establish and substantiate the day to day delay of 2403 days. In this case, the appellant has miserably failed to offer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
