Condonation of delay in ex parte tax appeals allowed where confusion over hearing date and illness showed no deliberate laches.

Delay in appeals against ex parte assessment orders was held liable to be condoned where the assessee showed genuine confusion about the hearing date, non-communication of the date, and illness, with no deliberate or intentional laches. The court applied the principle that limitation should not defeat substantial justice in such circumstances, and the appeals were therefore required to be heard on merits rather than rejected on limitation alone.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the appeals against ex parte assessment orders ought to have been condoned and the appeals decided on merits.

Analysis: The dispute arose from ex parte assessment proceedings and the assessee's recourse under Section 30 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act. The delay was attributed to confusion regarding the date fixed before the Assessing Authority, non-communication of the date, and illness of the assessee. In such circumstances, the assessee was not shown to have acted with any deliberate or intentional laches, and the interests of justice required that the matter not be rejected solely on limitation.

Conclusion: The delay in filing the appeals was liable to be condoned and the objections based on limitation were not sustained against the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an ex parte tax assessment leads to genuine confusion about the hearing date and the delay is not deliberate, delay in appeal should be condoned to advance substantial justice.

---