TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 257
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bstantial question of law is involved in the appeal and it is an appeal determining the classification under section 80 of the Gujarat VAT Act. It is also urged that if the delay is not condoned, exchequer would suffer on a permanent basis in as much as this is a case of determining the nature and not simply the collection of the tax. 4. On issuance of notice, the assessee appeared and filed the affidavit-in-reply. It is urged that at the stage of condonation of delay, the merit cannot be looked into. It is further urged that the applicant does not explain the huge amount of delay and particularly of 3 years, when the papers were forwarded to the office of the Government Pleader, till the date of filing of appeal. Since no explanation comes forth except the administrative lapse and when the delay is not sufficiently explained, no condonation should be permitted. 5. We have heard learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Jaimin Gandhi for the State, who has relied upon the decision of this Court dated 15.3.2013 rendered in the case of State of Gujarat vs. Welspun Gujarat Stahl Rohren Ltd decided in Civil Application No.253 of 2012 in Stamp No.1579 of 2012, to urge that the limitati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of 1710 days caused on account of administrative mechanism deserves to be allowed for the reasons to follow hereinafter. 8. It would be desirable at the outset to particularly note that ordinarily the Court while considering the question of condonation of delay would take into account sufficiency of the cause in explaining the delay caused in filing the proceedings and once being satisfied with sufficiency of the cause explained, it would not travel to the merit of the matter. However, there is no prohibition in the Court touching the merit of the case while considering the question of delay. In the instant case, as could be noticed from the explanation rendered by the applicant, we could notice that much delay has been caused at the end of the Government Pleader's Office. After order dated 14.8.2008 was pronounced by the Gujarat VAT Tribunal in Appeal No.5 of 2008 the order came to be communicated to the applicant petitioner. The proposal was sent to the Finance Department for filing the Tax Appeal on 5.11.2008 as per the business rules of the applicant petitioner. The Department approved and permitted filing of the appeal on on 10.12.2009. This decision was forwarded to the Gove....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....effect and, therefore, we are not in agreement with the submissions of learned advocate Mr.Kaji that this being only the determinative order, there is no loss of the exchequer. On the contrary, this would have a permanent effect on the collection of tax and therefore, considering the application for condonation of delay, the Court cannot be oblivious of the question of merit involved and following the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Limited (supra), the examination of the issue shall need to be on merit rather than rejecting the appeal on delay, when otherwise the permanent damage stares at the face of the State machinery. 12. This Court in the case of State of Gujarat vs. Welspun Gujarat Stahl Rohren Ltd. (supra) allowed the condonation of delay by holding thus: "We are conscious that there is a considerable delay in filing the Tax Appeal. We are also aware that much of the delay is attributable to the time consumed in the office of the Government Pleader in drafting the Tax Appeal. We are equally aware that in large number of tax appeals filed by the Government after a long delay, we had not accepted s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the matter is directly hit or hurt by the judgment sought to be subjected to appeal) and the inherited bureaucratic methodology imbued with the note-making, file-pushing, and passing-on-the-buck ethos, delay on its part is less difficult to understand though more difficult to approve. The State which represents collective cause of the community, does not deserve a litigant-non-grata status. The courts, therefore, have to be informed with the spirit and philosophy of the provision in the course of the interpretation of the expression of sufficient cause. Merit is preferred to scuttle a decision on merits in turning down the case on technicalities of delay in presenting the appeal. Delay as accordingly condoned, the order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the High Court for disposal on merits after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties. In Prabha v. Ram Parkash Kalra (1987 Supp SCC 339), this Court had held that the court should not adopt an injustice-oriented approach in rejecting the application for condonation of delay. The appeal was allowed, the delay was condoned and the matter was remitted for expeditious disposal in accordance with law. 14. In G. Rame....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is procedural delay incidental to the decision-making process. The delay of over one year was accordingly condoned. 15. It is axiomatic that decisions are taken by officers/agencies proverbially at slow pace and encumbered process of pushing the files from table to table and keeping it on table for considerable time causing delay intentional or otherwise is a routine. Considerable delay of procedural red-tape in the process of their making decision is a common feature. Therefore, certain amount of latitude is not impermissible. If the appeals brought by the State are lost for such default no person is individually affected but what in the ultimate analysis suffers, is public interest. The expression "sufficient cause" should, therefore, be considered with pragmatism in justiceoriented approach rather than the technical detection of sufficient cause for explaining every day's delay. The factors which are peculiar to and characteristic of the functioning of the governmental conditions would be cognizant to and requires adoption of pragmatic approach in justice-oriented process. The court should decide the matters on merits unless the case is hopelessly without merit. No separate st....