https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10814 A delay of more than 400 days in filing a review application was not condoned because the explanation showed only repeated movement of the file between departmental authorities, the CBDT, the Ministry of Law and standing counsel. The HC held that, although "sufficient cause" must be construed pragmatically, that standard cannot excuse casual and cavalier handling or apparent lethargy and inaction. On the facts, the explanation was neither bona fide nor satisfactory, so the condonation application was rejected. en-us Thu, 27 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 25 Jul 2009 15:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10814 A delay of more than 400 days in filing a review application was not condoned because the explanation showed only repeated movement of the file between departmental authorities, the CBDT, the Ministry of Law and standing counsel. The HC held that, although "sufficient cause" must be construed pragmatically, that standard cannot excuse casual and cavalier handling or apparent lethargy and inaction. On the facts, the explanation was neither bona fide nor satisfactory, so the condonation application was rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 27 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10814