9911796707
TMI Blog1959 (10) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Income-tax Act ran: Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal exercised its discretion in a judicial manner in refusing to excuse the delay in presenting the appeals? Before we deal with the question, we are constrained to point out that paragraph 7 in the statement of the case was wholly uncalled for. Whether this court was right or not in directi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shahzadi Begum [1952] 21 I.T.R. 1, which was approved of by the Supreme Court in Mela Ram and Sons v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1956] 29 I.T.R. 607, should be sufficient authority for what we stated above. Part of the head-note in Mela Ram's case [1956] 29 I.T.R. 607 ran: An appeal presented out of time is an appeal and an order dismissing it as time-barred is one passed in appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... each. That the statutory period of limitation was 60 days was never in issue. The specific case put forward by the appellant before the Tribunal was that she had been given wrong advice by the clerk that the period of limitation was two months, in that case two months each of 31 days. There was really no material for the Tribunal to disbelieve the statement, unless it be the Tribunal proceeded on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase, we have no hesitation in holding that the discretion exercised by the Tribunal in rejecting the application of the appellant to excuse the delay was not based on the relevant considerations they had to bear in mind. It was not a case of judicial exercise of a discretion at all. We answer the question in the negative and in favour of the assessee. As the assessee has succeeded, she will get ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
