Condonation of delay in statutory appeal granted, with conditional restoration of the appellate remedy and protection of revenue.

Delay in filing the statutory appeal against the assessment order was condoned because the explanation for non-filing was found genuine, including the claim that the order was noticed only later on the portal. The HC restored the appellate remedy in the interests of justice, but made the relief conditional by requiring an additional deposit over and above the pre-deposit already made. The rejection of the appeal and the assessment were set aside conditionally, recovery was kept in abeyance pending the appeal, and the matter was directed to be decided on merits after compliance with the deposit direction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the statutory appeal against the assessment order should be condoned and the rejection of the appeal set aside, with consequential restoration of the appeal for disposal on merits.

Analysis: The appeal had been rejected at the threshold for delay, but the explanation offered for the delay was accepted as genuine in the facts of the case. The assessment was stated to have been uploaded on the portal, and the petitioner claimed lack of knowledge of the order until the portal was accessed later. In the interests of justice, the Court granted one more opportunity to pursue the appellate remedy, while also protecting the revenue by directing payment of an additional amount over and above the pre-deposit already made. Pending disposal of the appeal, recovery was directed to be kept in abeyance.

Conclusion: The delay was condoned, the rejection of the appeal and the impugned assessment were set aside conditionally, and the appeal was directed to be entertained and decided in accordance with law after compliance with the directed deposit.

---