In course of filing its return of fringe benefit tax, assessee included certain amounts as chargeable to tax out of abundant caution. Subsequently, Commissioner (Appeals) allowed assessee’s claim and held that amounts included in FBT returns were not chargeable to FBT. Thereafter assessee filed an application under section 264 for refund of amount paid as FBT. Commissioner, however, rejected said application on ground that there was a substantial delay in filing same. Court held that  Commissioner (Appeals) took almost 5-6 years to decide assessee’s appeal therefore while considering question of condonation of delay under section 264, Commissioner should not take a pedantic approach but should be liberal and words ‘sufficient cause’ should be given a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when no negligence nor in action nor want of bona fide is imputable to assessee. Revisional power is coupled with a duty to exercise it in interests of justice of parties and revisional authority must act according to rules of reason and justice. Delay is condoned and directed the Commissioner to decide the matter on merits.  (AY. 2009-10)