Tribunal rejects Revenue's appeal on delay, emphasizes no forum shopping, imposes costs.

The Tribunal rejected Revenue's application seeking review of the order condoning the delay in filing an appeal. The Tribunal found the delay justified due to invoking the High Court's constitutional jurisdiction and noted the lack of support for Revenue's contentions in Supreme Court judgments. Additionally, the Tribunal emphasized that the assessee's actions did not amount to forum shopping or abuse of process. Criticizing Revenue's frivolous application, the Tribunal dismissed it, imposing costs on Revenue payable to the Prime Minister's Relief Fund to discourage such filings in the future.

---

---

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal.
2. Forum shopping and abuse of process of law.
3. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal to review an order.

Condonation of Delay:
The case involves an application by Revenue seeking review/rectification of an order condoning a nine-day delay in filing an appeal. The delay was due to the assessee initially preferring a Writ Petition before the High Court before filing the appeal with the Tribunal. The Tribunal found the cause for delay satisfactory as it was due to invoking the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court. Revenue argued against condoning the delay citing various Supreme Court decisions, alleging forum shopping. However, the Tribunal highlighted that the Supreme Court rulings referenced by Revenue did not support their contention. The Tribunal also noted that the assessed liability of the assessee appeared unsustainable on merits, even without an appeal, making the delay issue less significant.

Forum Shopping and Abuse of Process of Law:
Revenue contended that the assessee's actions amounted to forum shopping and abuse of the process of law by initially filing a Writ Petition before the High Court. The Tribunal analyzed the Supreme Court decisions referenced by Revenue, particularly the case of Chhabil Dass Agrawal, where the Court allowed the assessee to prefer an appeal despite filing a Writ Petition. The Tribunal emphasized that the actions of the assessee did not constitute abuse of process or forum shopping based on the legal precedents discussed. The Tribunal differentiated the present case from the cases cited by Revenue, emphasizing the lack of support for Revenue's contentions in those judgments.

Jurisdiction of the Tribunal to Review an Order:
The Tribunal addressed the fundamentally misconceived and frivolous nature of Revenue's application seeking review of the order condoning the delay. The Tribunal highlighted the lack of jurisdiction for the Tribunal to review an order condoning delay in presenting an appeal. The Tribunal criticized the filing of such frivolous applications and the wastage of time due to pursuing them. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application, imposing costs on Revenue payable to the Prime Minister's Relief Fund. The Tribunal emphasized the need to discourage the filing of such applications and marked the order for appropriate consideration by relevant authorities.

In conclusion, the Tribunal rejected Revenue's application seeking review of the order condoning the delay, emphasizing the lack of jurisdiction for such a review and dismissing the application with costs imposed on Revenue.

---