COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. POONAMCHAND M SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This motion is taken out for condoning the delay in filing the Petition for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court. The proposed appeal is from the decision of this High Court in ITR No. 444 of 1978 which decision was given on 7-10-1981.

(2.) The prescribed period of limitation for filing such a petition is sixth days. It is the case of the applicant that there is a delay of 54 days which is sought to be condoned. As against the prescribed period of limitation, the period of delay sought to be condoned is comparatively large.

(3.) However, even larger delay would be required to be condoned if sufficient cause is made out to explain every day's delay. In the instant case, the delay appears to have resulted from a combination of several factors such as forgetfulness on the part of the staff of the Central Government Advocate, archaic practices followed between the Central Government Advocate and the IT Department in particular regarding amounts which the Central Government Advocate can spend without obtaining specific sanction and similar matters. We have carefully gone through the affidavit filed by the ITO and the Superintendent working in the Office Government, Legal Department. We are of the opinion that the material brought on record in these two affidavits would not entile the court to condone the delay of this period. We are conscious that in the decision in ITR No. 444 of 1978 a large amount was involved but the merit of the decision or the importance of the proceeding or the stake involved can hardly have any relevance on the question of condonation of delay.