https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459895 Delay in filing a revision was not condoned because the applicant offered no sufficiently credible explanation for prolonged inaction, and no condonation application accompanied the revision when it was filed. Incorrect legal advice was held insufficient on these facts, particularly where the applicant was a commercial entity expected to act promptly after the earlier remedy failed. The Court applied the law of limitation strictly and held that liberal indulgence in such circumstances would undermine its object; the revision was therefore rejected as time-barred. en-us Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Jan 2025 15:05:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459895 Delay in filing a revision was not condoned because the applicant offered no sufficiently credible explanation for prolonged inaction, and no condonation application accompanied the revision when it was filed. Incorrect legal advice was held insufficient on these facts, particularly where the applicant was a commercial entity expected to act promptly after the earlier remedy failed. The Court applied the law of limitation strictly and held that liberal indulgence in such circumstances would undermine its object; the revision was therefore rejected as time-barred. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459895