https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24524 In excess profits tax reopening proceedings, the absence of a prescribed limitation period did not bar the court from examining whether the delay was so inordinate as to make reopening unfair and unwarranted. A delay of about 13 to 14 years, left satisfactorily unexplained, was treated as a material factor supporting refusal to permit reopening. The Tribunal's approach that such inordinate delay could justify rejecting the reopening was held consistent with the governing legal principle, and the assessee's position was upheld. en-us Tue, 30 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:01:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24524 In excess profits tax reopening proceedings, the absence of a prescribed limitation period did not bar the court from examining whether the delay was so inordinate as to make reopening unfair and unwarranted. A delay of about 13 to 14 years, left satisfactorily unexplained, was treated as a material factor supporting refusal to permit reopening. The Tribunal's approach that such inordinate delay could justify rejecting the reopening was held consistent with the governing legal principle, and the assessee's position was upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 30 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24524