STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (CT) NOW RE-DESIGNATED AS JOINT COMMISSIONER (CT) CHENNAI (NORTH DIVISION) Vs. TVL SINGARAPPU RANGIAH SHIVKUMAR & CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Reasons assigned for condoning the delay of 1541 days in representation is that the returned papers were mixed up. After taking charge by the new learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes), papers were traced out. Defects were rectified and represented with a delay of 1541 days.

(2.) On the aspect of condonation of delay, reasons to be assigned, contents of the supporting affidavit, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy, 2013 12 SCC 649, has broadly culled out the principles of law to be considered in the matter of condonation and it is suffice to extract paragraph No.21 from Esha Bhattacharjee's case.

(3.) Subsequently, after considering the Hon'ble Division Bench judgment of this Court in Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Ltd. Vs. Appellate Authority,1990 1 LLN 457 and decision of the Supreme Court in Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy, 2013 12 SCC 649, in H.Dohil Constructions Company Private Limted V. Nahar Exports Limited and Another, 2015 1 SCC 680, Hon'ble Supreme Court, at paragraph Nos.23 and 24, held as follows: