TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 626X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rayer is strongly opposed by the respondent on the ground that the applicant has not made out sufficient cause. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. In the application seeking such condonation of delay, it is stated inter alia that against the order dated 30th April 2010 passed by the Tribunal, a proposal to file Tax Appeal was sent to the Finance Department on 16th December 2010. On 12th January 2011, the Finance Department approved such proposal. On 19th January 2011, appeal papers alongwith judgment of the Tribunal were handed over to the office of the Government Pleader in the Gujarat High Court for filing the Tax Appeal. The office of the Government Pleader was, however, over burdened with heavy work of drafting and attend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he judgment of the Tribunal. It is stated as under : The applicant further says that, in the present case, the Tribunal passed the order on 30-04-2010, in Second Appeal 5 of 2010. The applicant states that, the order dated 30-04-2010, was communicated to the applicant on 14-05-2010. Thereafter, on 16-12-2010, the proposal to file the tax appeal was sent to the Finance Department and on 12-1-2011, Finance Department approved the proposal. After receiving the proposal from the Finance Department, on 19-1-2011, relevant papers along with judgment/order were handed over to the office of the Government Pleader High Court to file the Tax appeal. The applicant says that, the Tax Appeal was required to be filed or before 29-7-10. However, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal involves substantial question of law. Simultaneously, we also notice that the duty amount involved in the present case is in excess of ₹ 6 Crores. In our opinion, looking to the nature of delay, explanation rendered by the appellant in various affidavits and the tax impact in the appeal, we would be inclined to condoned the delay. We would not in the case of this nature, like to dismiss the State appeal without consideration on merits. The applicant has correctly placed reliance on the observation of Supreme Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax V. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Ltd, reported in [2011] 334 ITR 269 (SC), in which it was observed thus : 5. Looking to the amount of tax invo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lra (1987 Supp SCC 339), this Court had held that the court should not adopt an injustice oriented approach in rejecting the application for condonation of delay. The appeal was allowed, the delay was condoned and the matter was remitted for expeditious disposal in accordance with law. 14. In G. Ramegowda, Major v. Spl. Land Acquisition Officer (1988 (2) SCC 142), it was held that no general principle saving the party from all mistakes of its counsel could be laid. The expression sufficient cause must receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice and generally delays in preferring the appeals are required to be condoned in the interest of justice where no gross negligence or deliberate inaction or lack of bona ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id that those who bear responsibility of Government must have a little play at the joints . Due recognition of these limitations on governmental functioning of course, within reasonable limits is necessary if the judicial approach is not to be rendered unrealistic. It would, perhaps, be unfair and unrealistic to put Government and private parties on the same footing in all respects in such matters. Implicit in the very nature of Governmental functioning is procedural delay incidental to the decision making process. The delay of over one year was accordingly condoned. 15. It is axiomatic that decisions are taken by officers/agencies proverbially at slow pace and encumbered process of pushing the files from table to table and keeping it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esponsible for lapses, if any. Equally, the State cannot be put on the same footing as an individual. The individual would always be quick in taking the decision whether he would pursue the remedy by way of an appeal or application since he is a person legally injured while State is an impersonal machinery working through its officers or servants. 16. The above position was highlighted in State of Haryana v. Chandra Mani and Ors. (1996 (3) SCC 132); and Special Tehsildar, Land Acquisition, Kerala v. K.V. Ayisumma (1996 (10) SCC 634). It was noted that adoption of strict standard of proof sometimes fail to protract public justice, and it would result in public mischief by skilful management of delay in the process of filing an appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
