2013 (4) TMI 556

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPPEN JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P6, an order passed by the second respondent rejecting an application made by them for condonation of delay of 3 years, 4 months and 12 days in filing the appeal. 2. The first respondent had passed orders of assessment and penalty against the petitioner. Although, both the orders were produced along with t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to be not maintainable. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition has been filed. 5. Ext.P6 is the order impugned and insofar as it is relevant the order states thus: "The contention of the appellant is that the counsel of the appellant genuinely felt that penalty being a consequential order, separate appeal need not be filed. It was only when the appeal against the assessment was tak....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....herefore, the appellant failed to explain satisfactory reasons for the inordinate delay of 3 years, 4 months, 12 days. The application seeking condonation of delay has to necessarily fail and therefore, the same is dismissed. In the result, the appeal filed against penalty for the year 2005-2006 is also dismissed. Order accordingly." 6. Admittedly, the delay of 3 years, 4 months and 12 days ....