https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420059 A 1217-day delay in filing an appeal against a revisional order was not condoned because the appellant failed to show sufficient cause. The explanation that it acted on legal advice and believed the input tax credit dispute could be pursued in consequential reassessment proceedings and a writ petition was rejected, as the appellant knew of the revisional order, participated in remand proceedings without objection, and challenged the matter only after adverse consequential orders. The Court held that condonation in tax matters is not subject to an automatic liberal approach and must still satisfy settled discretionary parameters; inordinate delay without a credible and satisfactory explanation cannot be excused. en-us Wed, 09 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Mar 2022 08:58:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420059 A 1217-day delay in filing an appeal against a revisional order was not condoned because the appellant failed to show sufficient cause. The explanation that it acted on legal advice and believed the input tax credit dispute could be pursued in consequential reassessment proceedings and a writ petition was rejected, as the appellant knew of the revisional order, participated in remand proceedings without objection, and challenged the matter only after adverse consequential orders. The Court held that condonation in tax matters is not subject to an automatic liberal approach and must still satisfy settled discretionary parameters; inordinate delay without a credible and satisfactory explanation cannot be excused. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 09 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420059