Condonation of delay: unrebutted explanation for missed communication justified liberal acceptance and remand on merits.

A 309-day delay in filing an appeal before the Tribunal was condoned because the assessee showed that the order had been sent to an incorrect email address of the former representative and was not effectively communicated in time. The explanation was not rebutted by the revenue, as no counter-affidavit was filed challenging the stated cause. Applying a justice-oriented and liberal approach to delay matters, the Court accepted the explanation as sufficient cause, condoned the delay, and remitted the matter to the Tribunal for decision on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay of 309 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal was liable to be condoned.

Analysis: The delay was explained on the basis that the order had been communicated to the erstwhile representative through an incorrect email address and, therefore, the assessee had not received effective communication in time. The explanation remained unrebutted, as no counter-affidavit was filed by the revenue controverting the stated cause. In view of the Supreme Court's insistence on a justice-oriented and liberal approach in matters of delay, the explanation furnished by the assessee was accepted as sufficient cause.

Conclusion: The delay of 309 days was condoned in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded to the limited extent of obtaining condonation of delay and the matter was sent back to the Tribunal for decision on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a plausible and unrebutted explanation establishes sufficient cause, delay in filing an appeal should be condoned by adopting a justice-oriented and liberal approach.

---