2026 (3) TMI 427 - HC - VAT / Sales Tax

Condonation of Delay requires specific satisfactory explanation; routine file movements or officer changes are insufficient, so petition dismissed.

Condonation of delay requires specific, satisfactory explanation for each unexplained period; generalized reasons such as routine file movement or change ... Condonation of delay - delay of 847 days - inordinate and unexplained delay in filing the Sales Tax Revision Petition - routine movement of files not sufficient explanation. Condonation of delay - inordinate and unexplained delay - HELD THAT: - The petition was filed with a delay of 847 days and an application for condonation was supported by affidavits which described the chronology of communications, receipt of a Government Order approving filing, and a change of Law Officers. The Court examined the timeline and found substantial periods unaccounted for: no explanation was provided for the interval from 25.07.2022 to August 2023 (over one year), and no explanation for the further interregnum up to December 2024 (over sixteen months). The only additional ground advanced was routine movement of files. The Court held that such routine file movements cannot constitute a satisfactory or acceptable explanation for an inordinate delay of this magnitude. On this basis the affidavit did not furnish minimally acceptable reasons to justify condonation. [Paras 4, 5, 6, 7, 8] I.A. for condonation of delay rejected; delay held to be inordinate and unexplained. In view of the rejection of seeking condonation of the delay of 847 days in filing the present petition, the petition itself is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. The petition dismissed for being barred by inordinate and unexplained delay. Final Conclusion: The application for condonation of delay was rejected as the explanations for the 847-day delay were inadequate; consequently the revision petition was dismissed as time barred. Issues: Whether the delay of 847 days in filing the Sales Tax Revision Petition should be condoned under Section 65(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003.Analysis: The explanation for delay comprised initial communications beginning June-July 2022, receipt of Government authorization on 25.07.2022, an asserted change of Law Officers in August 2023, and subsequent affidavits. A substantial portion of the period from 25.07.2022 to August 2023 (over one year) and the interregnum from August 2023 to December 2024 (over sixteen months) remain unexplained. Routine movement of files and similar generalized reasons were relied upon but were not shown to be a satisfactory justification for the long delay. The affidavit did not furnish minimally acceptable particulars to establish sufficient cause for condonation.Conclusion: The application for condonation of delay is rejected and the Sales Tax Revision Petition is dismissed; the delay of 847 days is not satisfactorily explained (result adverse to the petitioner and therefore in favour of the assessee).Ratio Decidendi: A delay of 847 days will not be condoned where substantial periods remain unexplained and routine file movement or change of officers are not shown to be satisfactory reasons for such inordinate delay.