TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 887
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nal") in Appeal No. 190 of 2014, claiming the following substantial question of law:- Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case the Ld. Tribunal was justified in not condoning the delay wherein there exists a sufficient cause for the same? 2. Briefly stated, the facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The appellant is engaged in the business of Iron and Steel goods at Mandi Gobindgarh having TIN No. 03221136481. It had placed an order for import of heavy melting scrap from United States of America. The said goods entered India through Gateway Rail Freight India Limited in sealed containers. Each container was transported through a separate truck and the entry tax was paid. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Hence, the present appeal. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. The primary question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the delay of 120 days in filing the appeal before the DETC(A) was liable to be condoned in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 5. Examining the legal position relating to condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (in short, the "1963 Act") it may be observed that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Oriental Aroma Chemical Industries Ltd. v. Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation and another, (2010) 5 SCC 459 laying down the broad principles for adjudicating the issue of condonation of delay, in paras 14 & 15 observed as under:- "14. We have consi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d before us for the simple reason that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not lay down any standard or objective test. The test of "sufficient cause" is purely an individualistic test. It is not an objective test. Therefore, no two cases can be treated alike. The statute of limitation has left the concept of "sufficient cause" delightfully undefined, thereby leaving to the Court a well-intentioned discretion to decide the individual cases whether circumstances exist establishing sufficient cause. There are no categories of sufficient cause. The categories of sufficient cause are never exhausted. Each case spells out a unique experience to be dealt with by the Court as such." It was also recorded that:- "For the aforestated reasons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts dealing with the condonation of delay may not lay down any standard or objective test but is purely an individualistic test. The court is required to examine while adjudicating the matter relating to condonation of delay on exercising judicial discretion on individual facts involved therein. There does not exist any exhaustive list constituting sufficient cause. The applicant/petitioner is required to establish that inspite of acting with due care and caution, the delay had occurred due to circumstances beyond his control and was inevitable. 9. The question regarding whether there is sufficient cause or not, depends upon each case and is to be decided taking totality of events which had taken place in a particular case. Learned counsel ....