TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (3) TMI 1291
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Review Application. Brief facts are that the Appellate Tribunal vide its order dated 5th July, 2006 rejected their application for waiver of pre-deposit and gave the appellant 45 days from that day to deposit the said penalty. It appears that this period was further extended vide the tribunal order dated 19th January, 2007 as recorded in the final order dated 21st May, 2009. The final order reads as under:- "Para 4:- From the perusal of the above it is clear that it is the mandatory obligation on the part of the appellants to make pre-deposit of the penalty at the time of filing the appeal. This tribunal had shown enough latitude when permitting further period of 45 days vide order dated 19.01.2007". However, at the time of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... State of Maharashtra (writ petition no. 2774/2014) where it was held that what is relevant is as to whether a party seeking condonation of delay has made out a case of sufficient cause or not. (iii) The Supreme Court decision dated 19.02.1987 in Collector Land Acquisition Anantnag & Anr. V/s MST. Katiji and others; wherein the test of „sufficient cause‟ for condoning a delay in filing of appeal was the issue. He therefore argued that the powers of condoning the delay in filing the appeal was very much there with the appellate tribunal and in the present case the appellant being a poor man who was duped by his associates, because of his illiteracy and innocence is a sufficient cause for condoning the delay, and recalling t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that my appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 21.05.2009. I have not received copy of any such order..... Please supply me a copy of the order." Exactly when and how he got to know is not spelt out. So in January 2011 the appellant writes a letter to the Registry about the said final order dated 21.05.2009 but in the Review Application says that he got to know about the said order on 14th December, 2011. Moreover, there is available on record a copy of a letter in Subject "Appeal No. 75,76/2006" dated 26.05.2009 from the Asst. Registrar of the Appellate Tribunal addressed to the appellant stating "a certified true copy of the final order passed by the Tribunal on 21.05.2009 in the above mentioned RP/Appeal is forwarded h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aken note of. (v) Lack of bona fides imputable to a party seeking condonation of delay is a significant and relevant fact. (vii) The concept of liberal approach has to encapsule the conception of reasonableness and it cannot be allowed a totally unfettered free play. (viii) There is a distinction between inordinate delay and a delay of short duration or few days, for to the former doctrine of prejudice is attracted whereas to the latter it may not be attracted. That apart, the first one warrants strict approach whereas the second calls for a liberal delineation. (ix) The conduct, behavior and attitude of a party relating to its inaction or negligence are relevant factors to be taken into consideration. It....