https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26739 A later Supreme Court ruling may constitute sufficient cause for condoning delay in filing a tax appeal where the assessee had not appealed earlier because the then prevailing legal position made the challenge futile, especially in light of Article 265 and the remedial purpose of appeal or revision against unlawful levy. However, that cause must be causally linked to the delay; if the assessee could have appealed within time and no binding decision then prevented it, a later change in law alone will not justify condonation. The text distinguishes cases where assessment orders were received after the relevant High Court judgment from cases where they were received before it. en-us Fri, 27 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Aug 2013 18:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26739 A later Supreme Court ruling may constitute sufficient cause for condoning delay in filing a tax appeal where the assessee had not appealed earlier because the then prevailing legal position made the challenge futile, especially in light of Article 265 and the remedial purpose of appeal or revision against unlawful levy. However, that cause must be causally linked to the delay; if the assessee could have appealed within time and no binding decision then prevented it, a later change in law alone will not justify condonation. The text distinguishes cases where assessment orders were received after the relevant High Court judgment from cases where they were received before it. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 27 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26739