Kerala High Court
M/S.Alif Steel Agencies vs The Asst. Commissioner (Aa) on 31 July, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
MONDAY,THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2015/11TH JYAISHTA, 1937
WP(C).No. 11372 of 2012 (V)
----------------------------
PETITIONER :
-----------------------
M/S.ALIF STEEL AGENCIES,
VI/34, DEF, NEAR WATER TANK,
KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD,
REPRESENTED BY SRI. HAMEED P.V., PARTNER.
BY SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN,SENIOR ADVOCATE
ADVS. SMT.NISHA JOHN
SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN
SMT.BOBY M.SEKHAR
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER (AA),
COMMERCIAL TAXES, PALAKKAD-678 001.
2. THE DY. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) I,
COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM.
3. THE SECRETARY,
THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
ERNAKULAM.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LILLY.K.T.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 01-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C).NO.11372/2012
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS
EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND DEMAND NOTICE
DATED 31-7-2008.
EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 11-5-2009 IN KVATA
NO. 3084/08.
EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 5-1-2012.
EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT ALONG WITH PETITION FOR
CONDONATION OF DELAY DATED 5-1-2012.
EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISED ORDER DATED 21-12-11 PASSED BY THE
ASST. COMMISSIONER(ASSESSMENT),SPECIAL CIRCLE,COMMERCIAL
TAXES, PALAKKAD.
EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER INTP NO. 34/2012 IN TAVAT NO. 29/2012
DATED 16-2-2012.
EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT BY THE SALES TAX PRACTITIONER
DATED 19-4-2012.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO JUDGE
sts
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P.(C).No.11372/2012
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 1st Day of June, 2015
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner-firm approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P6 order whereby the application for condonation of delay and the appeal stands dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal. The appeal was filed against the assessment order for the year 2007-08. Petitioner's case is that they were not aware of the passing of the order by the First Appellate Authority. It is only when Ext.P5 modified order was passed, they came to know about it. Disbelieving the petitioner's case, the Tribunal dismissed the application for condonation of delay. The delay is around 885 days.
2. It is to be noted that the petitioner's case is that the Tax Practioner failed to inform him about the order passed by the Tribunal. No doubt, there is such a huge delay. The petitioner also produced Ext.P7 W.P.(C).No.11372/2012 -:2:- an affidavit sworn to by the Tax Practioner, wherein it is stated as follows:
"I am the sales tax practioner whom the appellant had engaged for filing appeal against the assessment for the year 2006-07. I had represented the appellant before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeal), Ernakulam. The Appellate Order on KVATA 3084/98 dated 27/09/2008 was delivered to me on 04/06/2009. On going through the order it was seen that the assessment had been reduced. On the face of it, the direction of the first appellate authority to allow special rebate for the additon under section 6(2) appeared to provide considerable relief. Therefore, I did not recommended for filing second appeal. It was on receipt of the modified order dated 21/12/2011 that it was realised that the granting of special rebate did not provide any actual relief. This contributed to the delay in filing second appeal."
3. Though it appears that there are certain laches on the part of the petitioner, nevertheless, taking into account the demand which would be around Rs.33 lakhs, I am of the view that in delay petition, a W.P.(C).No.11372/2012 -:3:- broader approach ought to have been taken by the Tribunal.
4. In that view of the matter, the impugned order is set aside. Delay is condoned and the appeal is directed to be restored to file. The appeal shall be considered within a period of four months. The above order is passed on condition that the petitioner deposits an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with the Ernakulam Mediation Centre (High Court) within three weeks. The petitioner shall produce copy of the receipt before the Tribunal along with a copy of this judgment, for compliance.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ms