<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1976 (9) TMI 145 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151208</link>
    <description>Delay condonation under the proviso to section 23(3)(a) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act is discretionary and requires a diligent applicant to explain the entire period of delay satisfactorily. The record showed an unexplained and substantial lapse after receipt of the appellate orders, including delay in obtaining records and further delay thereafter. The assumption that the concerned officer may have lacked capacity had no supporting material, and the Tribunal&#039;s finding of diligence was one no reasonable decision-maker applying settled principles could reach. The condonation of delay was therefore held unjustified, and the Tribunal&#039;s order was quashed in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2013 16:14:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168247" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (9) TMI 145 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151208</link>
      <description>Delay condonation under the proviso to section 23(3)(a) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act is discretionary and requires a diligent applicant to explain the entire period of delay satisfactorily. The record showed an unexplained and substantial lapse after receipt of the appellate orders, including delay in obtaining records and further delay thereafter. The assumption that the concerned officer may have lacked capacity had no supporting material, and the Tribunal&#039;s finding of diligence was one no reasonable decision-maker applying settled principles could reach. The condonation of delay was therefore held unjustified, and the Tribunal&#039;s order was quashed in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151208</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>