TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 1422
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....admitted due tax for the assessment year in question. He submits that initially an ex-parte assessment order was passed on 13.6.2015, which was recalled under Section 32 of the Act and thereafter again a fresh assessment order was passed on 12.6.2016 estimating the tax liability of Rs. 8,10,906/- against which, a first appeal was preferred by the petitioner before the Additional Commissioner, Grade II, Bulandshahr. The said first appeal was allowed vide order dated 8.6.2016 and the petitioner was granted relief of Rs. 6,54,500/- towards the tax liability. However, still feeling aggrieved to the said order, the petitioner filed a second appeal before the Tribunal, which is still pending and dates are being fixed from time to time for hearing of the appeal and the State are also represented. 4. He further submits that order of the first appellate authority has attained finality on 10.10.2016 as the department has not preferred any statutory appeal before the Commercial Tax Tribunal within the limitation. However, the revenue department has preferred a second appeal on 8.1.2018 against the order of first appellate authority with the delay of 453 days, along with delay condonation a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... In the facts of the present case, considering the delay was of more than 689 days, the explanation offered was wholly inadequate and facile. Neither the name or particulars of the officials or their designations were disclosed nor the extra duties assigned to them were disclosed nor there was any other stand disclosed as may establish credibility of the explanation. It appears that the explanation was merely a pretence and/or an after thought to seek condonation of delay without stating true and correct facts. Al so, there is no allegation of fraud or collusion on part of the assessee in causing the delay." 7. He further relied upon the judgment and order of this Court in Sales/ Trade Tax Revision Defective No. 55 of 2014 (C.C.T. Vs. S/S Jagdish Prasad and sons) decided on 16.1.2015, in which it has been held that the work of no department can be left unattended only for the reason that there is shortage of employees or that the officers has not been posted. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 13348 of 2020 (State of M.P. and others Vs. Chaitram Maywade) decided on 27.10.2020....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2306;ख्या. ../2017 आयुक्त राज्य कर उत्तर प्रदेश लखनऊ........बनाम वादी सर्वश्री के॰सी॰ फ्लोर मिल, सुभाष रोड, खुर्जा विषय:- विलम्ब क्षमा प्रार्थना-पत्र लिमिटेशन एक्ट की धारा-5 के अन्तर्गत निम्न आधारों पर प्रस्तुत किया जा र&#....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....51;ा जा सका है- 1. यह है कि कर निर्धारण अधिकारी द्वारा अवगत कराया गया है कि खण्ड में कोई स्थायी अधिकारी नियुक्त न होने, बरिष्ट सहायक की तैनाती न होने तथा विधानसभा चुनाव में परिक्षक के साथ अधिकारी की तैनाती होने क&....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....हायक व एक आशुलिपिक) तैनात हैं। राज्य प्रतिनिधि कार्यालय में कोई टंकण भी तैनात नहीं हैं। स्टाफ की अत्यधिक कमी के कारण द्वितीय अपील समय से दाखिल नहीं की जा सकी। 3- यह है कि द्वितीय अपील दायर करने में दिनांक 10.10.2016 स&#....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2352;ीम कोर्ट द्वारा सर्वश्री O.P.Kathpolian v. Lakhmir Singh (dead) & Ors. ((1984) 4 SCC (66) तीन सदस्य बैंच ने निर्णय दिया है कि if the refusal to condone the delay result in grave miscarriage of justice it would be a ground to condone the delay. Delay was accordingly condoned." इसके अतिरिक्त मा० सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने सर्व श्री State of Haryana vs Chandra Mani & Ors on 30 January, 1996 AIR 1623, SCC (3) 132], in G. Ramegowda, Major & Ors, v. Spl, Land Acquisition Officer, Bangalore [(1988) 2 SCC 142] The delay of over one year was accordingly condoned. In M/s. Shakambari & Co.v. Union of India [(1993) Supp. 1 SCC 487], a Bench of three Judge ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1;य कर अधिकरण पीठ अलीगढ़ " 14. The petitioner submitted its objection along with various judgements of this Court as well as Hon'ble the Supreme Court, however, without considering the same, the delay in filing the appeal has been condoned and second appeal filed by the department has been admitted. On perusal of the said application for condonation of delay, it transpires that the reasons assigned by the department were that there was no competent officer, who discharge the duty as well as the officers were on election duty and also there was a shortage of manpower in the department as such the appeal could not be preferred within limitation. So far as the plea taken by the State that the officers were on election duty are concerned, specific objection was raised by the petitioner in this respect giving the details of the officers, who were on election duty and also put the relevant materials on record to controvert the other grounds raised for condonation of delay, however, without considering the same, the impugned order has been passed. The explanation given for co....