9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 1097X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly has some effect on the revenue. It cannot be construed as No revenue loss as canvassed by the learned counsel for the appellant. Compared to the Government, Private litigant stands on a better pedestal in taking a decision and filing the appeal before the Court. Merely for the reason that in the appeal filed by the Government delay is condoned, the same yardstick cannot be applied blindly but requires to be examined having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. No doubt, delay of 1754 days has been condoned - It is the discretionary power vested with the Court, to be exercised judiciously having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. The inordinate delay of 1217 days in the background of the facts cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llowability of the input tax credit. However, fresh re-assessment orders were passed on 25.11.2020 and 27.11.2020 for the tax periods in question disallowing the input tax credit claimed by the appellant in the revised returns filed beyond six months. As such, rectification applications were filed before the Assessing Officer, which came to be rejected vide order dated 14.12.2020, against which W.P.No.607/2021 was filed by the appellant before this Court on 23.12.2020 challenging the assessment orders as well as rectification order. The Writ Court vide order dated 27.01.2021 had set aside the order dated 14.12.2020 rejecting the applications filed by the assessee and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for its reconsideration. At t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts, it is submitted that no different yardstick could be adopted to the private litigant compared with the State. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that since no statement of objection is filed by the revenue, the delay has to be condoned and the matter has to be heard on merits. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the revenue refuting the arguments advanced by the learned Senior counsel for the appellant submitted that the affidavit filed by the appellant is self-contradictory. Having admitted the filing of writ petition before this Court on 23.12.2020, no different stand would be taken in filing this appeal is concerned, the appellant having suffered in the consequential re-assessment orders, now cannot chall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en to challenge the order of the Addl. Commissioner. Merely for the reason that a legal advice was given to the appellant while preferring the writ petition before this Court, the appeal cannot be entertained with an inordinate delay of 1217 days in filing the appeal. 9. At this juncture, it would be apt to refer to the judgment relied upon by the learned Senior counsel for the appellant in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag, supra. The Hon ble Apex Court has considered the delay of only 4 days in filing the appeal by the State against enhancement amount of compensation for acquisition of land for public purpose. The High Court having dismissed the appeal on hyper-technical ground of bar of limitation with reference to Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 008 which fact was not disputed. In that context, the delay of 1754 days was condoned as the appellants therein were confronted with auction notices in June 2008 issued by the competent authority. 13. In the light of these judgments, we have analysed the case on hand. With great respect, that none of the aforesaid judgments would come to the aid of the appellant since it is not the case of the appellant that he was oblivious of the order dated 11.01.2018 passed by the Addl. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes indeed as mentioned herein above, in compliance with the said order, the appellant has participated in the proceedings before the prescribed authority and suffered an order and challenged the same in the writ petition. 14. The argum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and circumstances of the case. In this regard, this Court finds it apt to refer to the judgment of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Esha Bhattacharjee vs Mg.Commit. of Raghunathpur Nafar reported in (2013) 12 SCC 649, wherein the Hon ble Apex Court has distinguished the ordinary delay and inordinate delay and has summarized the legal principles as under: 21.8 viii) There is a distinction between inordinate delay and a delay of short duration or few days, for to the former doctrine of prejudice is attracted whereas to the latter it may not be attracted. That apart, the first one warrants strict approach whereas the second calls for a liberal delineation. 21.9 ix) The conduct, behaviour and attitude of a party relating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
