On appeal the Tribunal held that the Tribunal instead of considering the facts and appreciating the submissions made by the assessee, had gone tangent by referring to the provisions of section 255(5) ignoring the provisions of section 253(5). From the observations and the findings arrived at by the Tribunal, it was apparent that it had decided the miscellaneous application as if the assessee had filed an appeal rather than referring to the mistake committed by it while rejecting the cross-objection filed by the assessee. When there was sufficient cause explained by the assessee by filing an affidavit in support of the cross-objections, the Tribunal had not applied its mind but had without any basis mentioned to the effect, that the assessee had made a story for condonation of delay, which was not supported by any evidence and hence, even delay of 31 days could not be condoned. The delay of 31 days was condoned.  Order of Tribunal set aside and tribunal is directed to decide the matter on merits. (BP. 1-4-1988 to 16-2-1999)