Writ jurisdiction and condonation of delay: High Court intervenes to allow a delayed tax appeal to be heard on merits.

Section 62(3) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 limits the appellate authority's power to condone delay to the prescribed statutory extent, but the High Court may in an exceptional case invoke Articles 226 and 227 to prevent failure of justice where sufficient cause is shown. In this matter, the delay in filing the statutory appeal was explained on the ground of illness, and the reassessment order carried a substantial tax demand. The Court treated the case as one warranting supervisory interference rather than rejection on limitation grounds, condoned the delay, and directed the appellate authority to hear the appeal on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court should exercise writ jurisdiction to condone the delay in filing the statutory appeal beyond the period permissible under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and remand the appeal for decision on merits.

Analysis: Section 62(3) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 limits the appellate authority's power to condone delay to the prescribed extent and does not permit condonation beyond that statutory ceiling. However, where valuable rights are involved and the appellant shows sufficient cause, the High Court can exercise its supervisory and writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India in an exceptional case to prevent failure of justice. The reassessment order involved a substantial tax demand, the delay had been explained on the ground of illness, and the Court found that the matter warranted interference rather than rejection on a technical ground of limitation.

Conclusion: The delay was condoned and the appeal was directed to be heard on merits by the appellate authority.

---