https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64577 The Reference Applications filed by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax were rejected as time-barred due to a delay of 220 days, exceeding the statutory limit for condonation. The department's reliance on the Receipt Register was insufficient to justify the delay, as evidence showed prior refusals of service. The judgment emphasized the equal application of limitation laws to both parties and the necessity of timely actions in legal proceedings. The lack of diligence and failure to explain the refusal of service led to the dismissal of the applications, highlighting the importance of adhering to procedural rules. The decision focused solely on the timeliness issue, resulting in the rejection of the Reference Applications. en-us Thu, 15 Oct 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Feb 2011 16:34:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64577 The Reference Applications filed by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax were rejected as time-barred due to a delay of 220 days, exceeding the statutory limit for condonation. The department's reliance on the Receipt Register was insufficient to justify the delay, as evidence showed prior refusals of service. The judgment emphasized the equal application of limitation laws to both parties and the necessity of timely actions in legal proceedings. The lack of diligence and failure to explain the refusal of service led to the dismissal of the applications, highlighting the importance of adhering to procedural rules. The decision focused solely on the timeliness issue, resulting in the rejection of the Reference Applications. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 15 Oct 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64577