Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

M/S Rural Electrification Proj vs Union Of India & Anr on 7 September, 2012

Author: Prakash Tatia

Bench: Chief Justice, Aparesh Kumar Singh

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI            W.P (T)   No.   1283    of 2012     M/s. Rural Electrification Project, D.V.C   Vs.  Union of India & Ano.  

                                           ­­­­­
            CORAM:                 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE 

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Appellant/Petitioner :  Mr.P.K.Singh  For the Respondents             : M/s. Ratnesh Kumar, Sr.S.C.C (Excise) Amit Kumar   ­­­­­­     Dated 7    September, 2012 th     The   petitioner   has   challenged   Annexure   -   1   dated   14.2.2012.  According   to   the   learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner,   though   there   is  provision of appeal under section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 to challenge  the order dated 14.2.2012, but the appellate authority is not accepting the  appeal of the petitioner. 

It   appears   that   by   Annexure   -   1   dated   14.2.2012,   petitioner's  objection   against the levy of interest has been rejected and therefore, it  amounts to  a  decision on the issue  raised  by the petitioner. Section 85  provides for appeal against the order and therefore, in the fact situation  the   appellate   authority   can   entertain   the   appeal   because   it   requires  adjudication on the issue with respect to the point of time from which the  interest is leviable upon the tax in question. Therefore, this application is  disposed   of   with   liberty   to   the   petitioner   to   prefer   appeal   before   the  competent authority under section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 and if there  is   delay   in   preferring   the   appeal,   the   appeal     shall   be   followed   by   an  appropriate application for condonation of delay, which may be considered  sympathetically by the appellate authority.    

(Prakash Tatia, C.J.) (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) dey