CA Bimal Jain | Jul 12, 2021 | Views 1879080

Penalty imposed on Revenue for lethargy delay in filing SLP

Penalty imposed on Revenue for lethargy delay in filing SLP

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Union of India & Ors. v. M/s Vishnu Aroma Pouching Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. [Special Leave Petition(Civil) Diary No(s). 1434/2021 dated June 29, 2021] has imposed penalty of 25000/- INR on the Revenue Department for delay in filing the Special Leave Petition (“SLP”) for wastage of judicial time. Further, directed to recover the amount from officers responsible for the delay in filing the SLP.


This petition has been filed by the Revenue Department (“the Petitioner”) against the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of M/s Vishnu Aroma Pouching Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India [R/Special Civil Application No. 5629 of 2019 dated November 14, 2019], wherein the Court held that, the assessee cannot be saddled with the liability of paying excessive interest at the rate of 18% p.a. on the tax liability, which was already discharged on time, but not recorded due to system-glitch/crash without there being any default on assessee’s part.


  • Whether the SLP filed by the Petitioner without any valid reason for condonation of delay is admissible?


The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 1434/2021 dated June 29, 2021 held as under:

  • Noted that, the proposal for filing the SLP was sent by the officials of the Petitioner after six months on May 20, 2020 and after that, the same was filed after another three months on August 25, 2020.
  • Opined that, such kind of lethargy on part of the Petitioner with so much computerization having been achieved is not acceptable and the delay in filing SLP in a casual manner and without any cogent or plausible ground for condonation of delay, shows incompetence of the Petitioner.
  • Stated that, the Court has repeatedly discouraged State Governments and public authorities for adopting the casual approach towards the Supreme Court and ignoring the period of limitation prescribed by the statutes, as if the limitation statute does not apply to them.
  • Categorized the matter as “certificate case” filed with the only object to obtain a quietus from the Court as a last resort, and the objective is to complete a mere formality and save the skin of the officers who may be in default in following the due process or may have done it deliberately.
  • Imposed penalty of INR 25000/- on the Petitioner looking to the period of delay and the casual manner in which the application has been filed, and for wastage of judicial time which has its own value
  • Directed to deposit the penalty in the Supreme Court Advocates on Record Welfare Fund within four weeks.
  • Further directed the Petitioner to recover the amount from the officers responsible for the delay in filing the SLP and to file a certificate of recovery.

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are strictly of the author and A2Z Taxcorp LLP. The contents of this article are solely for informational purpose. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the author nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon.

StudyCafe Membership

Join StudyCafe Membership. For More details about Membership Click Join Membership Button

Join Membership

In case of Any Doubt regarding Membership you can mail us at [email protected]

Join Studycafe's WhatsApp Group or Telegram Channel for Latest Updates on Government Job, Sarkari Naukri, Private Jobs, Income Tax, GST, Companies Act, Judgements and CA, CS, ICWA, and MUCH MORE!"


Author Bio

My Recent Articles

Actions taken by the department during enquiry need not necessarily be termed as harassment Who are liable to generate e-invoice w.e.f October 1, 2022 Personal penalty cannot be imposed on the Chairman of the Company for failure in ensuring proper accounting of the goods Stayed the order of cancellation of GST Registration of the assessee for continuing the trading activities Can CA be arrested- Section 69 vs Section 132 of the CGST Act View All Posts

Leave a Reply