Mistaken reliance on later-reversed precedent does not by itself justify condonation of delay in tax appeals.

Mistaken reliance on an earlier Tribunal view, later reversed, was not sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing second appeals under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act. The assessee had chosen not to appeal while that view supported rejection of its claim, and later sought to revive the matter after reversal. The governing principle stated is that a party's reliance on an earlier decision that is subsequently overturned does not, by itself, extend limitation where the appeal could have been filed in time. The delay was therefore not condoned and the Revenue's position prevailed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee's reliance on an earlier Tribunal decision, later reversed by the High Court, constituted sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing the second appeals under section 71 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969.

Analysis: The delay arose because the assessee chose not to file the second appeals while an earlier Tribunal view supported the rejection of its claim. Once that view was reversed, the assessee filed the appeals and sought condonation. The governing principle applied was that mistaken reliance on an earlier decision, which is later reversed, does not by itself amount to sufficient cause for extending limitation. In these circumstances, the Tribunal was justified in refusing to condone the delay.

Conclusion: The question was answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue; the delay was not liable to be condoned.

Ratio Decidendi: Reliance on an earlier decision that is subsequently reversed does not constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay where the party could have filed the appeal within time.

---