Condonation of delay requires a believable explanation; unexplained delay in filing and re-submission justified refusal of relief.

Delay in presenting and re-presenting an appeal must be supported by a satisfactory factual explanation showing that the delay was beyond the appellant's control; otherwise, condonation is not warranted. Here, the admitted tax was not paid on time, the appeal papers were returned for rectification, and there was a further long delay in re-submission. The explanation for the delay was found neither acceptable nor believable, so bona fides did not arise for consideration. The Tribunal's discretion in refusing to condone the delay was therefore upheld, and the revision was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in presenting and re-presenting the appeal was sufficiently explained so as to justify condonation and interference with the Tribunal's refusal to condone the delay.

Analysis: The admitted tax was not paid in time, the appeal papers were returned for rectification, and there was a further long delay in re-submission. The explanation offered for the delays was found to be neither acceptable nor believable. In the absence of a satisfactory factual explanation showing that the delay was beyond the appellant's control, the question of considering bona fides did not arise. The Tribunal's exercise of discretion in refusing to condone the delay was found to be proper.

Conclusion: The refusal to condone the delay was upheld and the revision was dismissed.

---