https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221679 A revision filed beyond the twelve-month limitation under Rule 76(4) of the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Rules, 1995 was excused because the delay was explained by a bona fide clerical mistake in counsel's office. The order copy had been wrongly tagged in a disposed file and could not be traced within time, and the explanation was not rebutted. Applying the principle that an innocent litigant should not suffer for counsel's inadvertence, the Court held that sufficient cause existed. The delay was condoned and the revisional authority was directed to restore the revision and decide it on merits after hearing both parties. en-us Wed, 21 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Mar 2013 18:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221679 A revision filed beyond the twelve-month limitation under Rule 76(4) of the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Rules, 1995 was excused because the delay was explained by a bona fide clerical mistake in counsel's office. The order copy had been wrongly tagged in a disposed file and could not be traced within time, and the explanation was not rebutted. Applying the principle that an innocent litigant should not suffer for counsel's inadvertence, the Court held that sufficient cause existed. The delay was condoned and the revisional authority was directed to restore the revision and decide it on merits after hearing both parties. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 21 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221679