https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192488 A Bombay HC decision on condonation of delay in removing office objections stressed that an application must contain material and relevant particulars explaining every period of delay. Vague averments about transfer of officials or lapses by an advocate's clerk were found insufficient because the affidavit did not identify the concerned official, specify the posting period, or explain when the lapse was discovered. On that basis, the unexplained 1521-day delay was not condoned and the Revenue's appeal failed for want of prosecution. Procedural compliance and a properly supported affidavit were treated as essential to seeking relief from delay. en-us Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Jun 2017 09:54:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192488 A Bombay HC decision on condonation of delay in removing office objections stressed that an application must contain material and relevant particulars explaining every period of delay. Vague averments about transfer of officials or lapses by an advocate's clerk were found insufficient because the affidavit did not identify the concerned official, specify the posting period, or explain when the lapse was discovered. On that basis, the unexplained 1521-day delay was not condoned and the Revenue's appeal failed for want of prosecution. Procedural compliance and a properly supported affidavit were treated as essential to seeking relief from delay. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192488