Condonation of delay in revenue tax appeals upheld, but deficient reasoning led to costs against the revenue.

Condonation of delay in revenue tax appeals was upheld because no serious error was shown in the High Court's decision, but the Supreme Court noted that the recorded reasons were deficient and that delay applications must be examined carefully on the facts stated. The challenge to the condonation orders therefore failed, while costs were awarded to the assessees in each appeal as a consequence of the inadequate reasoning. The ruling reinforces that delay may be condoned where justified, but the supporting application must be scrutinised with due care and proper factual basis.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in condoning the delay in filing the revenue appeals, and whether any consequential costs were warranted.

Analysis: The delay was examined as one arising in tax appeals filed by the revenue. The Court found no serious error in the decision to condone the delay, but noted that the reasons recorded for condonation were deficient and that applications for condonation of delay must be considered on the basis of the facts stated with due care.

Conclusion: The condonation of delay was upheld, and the revenue was directed to pay costs to the assessees in each appeal.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the condonation orders did not succeed, though the Court imposed costs while disposing of the special leave petitions.

Ratio Decidendi: Condonation of delay may be sustained where no serious error is shown, but the application must be scrutinised on the facts and inadequate reasoning may justify an award of costs.

---