Inordinate delay in tax reopening may justify refusal even without a statutory limitation period.

In excess profits tax reopening proceedings, the absence of a prescribed limitation period did not bar the court from examining whether the delay was so inordinate as to make reopening unfair and unwarranted. A delay of about 13 to 14 years, left satisfactorily unexplained, was treated as a material factor supporting refusal to permit reopening. The Tribunal's approach that such inordinate delay could justify rejecting the reopening was held consistent with the governing legal principle, and the assessee's position was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether, despite the absence of a statutory limitation period, inordinate delay in reopening excess profits tax proceedings could justify refusal to permit reopening.

Analysis: The proceedings for reopening were initiated after a delay of about 13 to 14 years, and the delay was not satisfactorily explained. The absence of an express period of limitation did not preclude the Court from considering whether the delay was so unreasonable as to make the reopening unfair and unwarranted. The Tribunal's approach, which treated inordinate delay as a relevant and material factor, was held to be consistent with the governing legal approach.

Conclusion: The issue was answered in favour of the assessee, and the Tribunal's view that the reopening could not be sustained on account of inordinate delay was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Even where no limitation period is prescribed, inordinate and unexplained delay in initiating statutory reopening proceedings may justify quashing or refusing to permit the reopening.

---