Bona fide mistaken pursuit of remedy can justify condonation of delay when uncontroverted and free from mala fides.

Delay in filing an appeal against a sales tax order was condoned where the assessee had bona fide pursued a remedy under a mistaken belief about the operative order. The record showed no limitation objection when the appeal was filed, the delay point was raised only at arguments, and the assessee's explanation that it learned of the relevant order later, obtained a certified copy, and acted under a genuine belief that only one order existed was not rebutted. In the absence of mala fides or any apparent advantage from the delay, the Court treated these facts as sufficient cause. The order dismissing the appeal as time-barred was quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the appeal against the sales tax order could be condoned on the ground that the assessee had bona fide prosecuted a remedy under a wrong belief.

Analysis: The appeal had been dismissed as time-barred, but the record showed that no objection on limitation had been raised when the appeal was filed and the question was raised only later at the stage of arguments. The assessee explained that it had come to know of the relevant order only later, had sought and obtained the certified copy, and had acted under a bona fide belief that there was only one order concerning the change in registration number. These assertions were not rebutted. In the absence of mala fides or any indication of gain from the delay, the Court treated the bona fide pursuit of the remedy under a mistaken belief as sufficient cause.

Conclusion: The delay was condoned and the dismissal of the appeal as time-barred was quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: Bona fide prosecution of a remedy under a wrong belief, when uncontroverted and free from mala fides, constitutes sufficient cause for condonation of delay.

---