Assessee-company filed appeal before Tribunal after delay of six to seven years.Assessee also filed an application for condonation of delay on ground that it promptly handed over documents to counsel and professional expert grossly failed to take action for which assessee-company should not be penalized.Tribunal held that the  assessee was aware of orders passed by Commissioner (Appeals) but assessee had not exercised any care to enquire about status of second appeal and tried to shift responsibility towards his lawyer. Tribunal has relied upon the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Mani Ram Sewa Nyasi Sangh Ayodhya v. CIT [2020] 119 taxmann.com 3838 (SC), wherein the Supreme Court has held that it was otherwise the duty of the assessee to watch the affairs of its firm and delay of few days or months can be considered, but delay of years is required to be examined minutely.Tribunal, thus, refused to condone delay and consequently dismissed appeals as time barred. On appeal the Court held that there is no general proposition that mistake of counsel by itself is always a sufficient ground for condonation of delay and every case is required to be considered on basis of facts and circumstances of case. Order of tribunal affirmed.(AY. 2010-11, 2012-13)