Liberal construction of sufficient cause upheld where a short appeal delay was explained by bona fide mistaken belief.

A four-day delay in filing an appeal was condoned because the assessee showed sufficient cause through a written explanation that the order and papers were believed to have been received on 29 April 1974. The mistaken belief created a bona fide impression about the filing period, and the short delay, together with communication to counsel, was treated as adequate proof of absence of negligence, inaction, or lack of bona fides. Applying a liberal approach to "sufficient cause" in order to advance substantial justice, the delay was held properly condoned.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay of four days in filing the appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner should be condoned on the basis of sufficient cause.

Analysis: The assessee supported the explanation for delay by a letter showing that the order and related papers were believed to have been received on 29 April 1974, which created a bona fide impression as to the time for filing the appeal. The expression "sufficient cause" was applied liberally so as to advance substantial justice where there was no negligence, inaction, or want of bona fides attributable to the appellant. The shortness of the delay and the written communication to counsel were treated as adequate proof of the mistaken belief.

Conclusion: The delay was rightly condoned and the assessee succeeded on the issue.

---