TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 1144
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s Sales Tax Revision Petition by the State Authorities is directed against the order dated 26.07.2022 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in STA.Nos.3502-3549/2013, 3550-3597/2013 and Cross ST Appeal Nos. 135-230/2016 insofar as it holds that the respondent herein is entitled to claim exemption of stock transfer (Common Point No. 1 in STA. No. 3502 to 3549 of 2013 and STA. No. 3550 to 3597 of 2013); and consequently, restoring the order of the FAA dated 30.09.2013 insofar as it disallows the claim for exemption on stock transfers made by the respondent herein to hear arguments afresh. 2. Heard learned Additional Government Advocate Sri. Aditya Vikram Bhat for petitioners/State and learned counsel Sri.Bharat B. Raichandani along wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... petition and further submits that the concerned officer was on medical emergency and as such the draft could not be approved. Further, learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that the substantial questions of law raised in the Revision Petition needs consideration and if the delay is not condoned, the State would suffer huge revenue loss. Thus, learned Additional Government Advocate would pray for accepting the cause shown in the affidavit accompanying the application and in the better affidavit. Thus, he prays for allowing the I.A.1/2024 for condonation of delay and to entertain revision petition. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel Sri. Bharat B. Raichandani appearing for respondent vehemently opposes the condonation by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../2024 is liable to be rejected for the following reasons: Condonation of delay depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. No straight jacket formula can be followed in the matter of condonation of delay. Further, the length of delay is not determinable factor, but how the delay is explained is the main factor to be considered to condone the delay. 9. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the recent decision in SHIVAMMA (DEAD) BY LRS (supra) in the matter of condonation of delay at paragraph 128 to 134 has observed as follows: "128. When it comes to condonation of delay, the length of delay is immaterial, and what matters is the acceptability of the explanation. A short delay may still warrant dismissal if unsupported ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ay that the length of delay is irrelevant. A long delay naturally casts a heavier burden on the applicant to furnish cogent, credible, and convincing explanations. The proof required becomes stricter in proportion to the delay. The longer the time elapsed, the stronger the justification that must be put forth. Hence, length is instructive in determining the degree of scrutiny, but it is not determinative of the outcome. 133. The length of the delay functions as a contextual indicator but not a determinative factor. It alerts the court to the degree of rigour required in examining the explanation, yet the ultimate focus remains on whether "sufficient cause" has been shown. The doctrine thereby preserves both the integrity of statuto....