1975 (5) TMI 77 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
- Determination of the time requisite for obtaining a certified copy of an order under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959.

Analysis:
The case involved a question of law regarding the computation of the time requisite for obtaining a certified copy of an order under the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959. The dispute arose from the discrepancy between the date the dealer made an application for the certified copy by registered post (3rd June, 1968) and the date it was received by the authority concerned (6th June, 1968). The Tribunal held that the time requisite for obtaining the copy should commence from the date it was received, not the date of posting. The key issue for determination was whether the time taken in postal transit should be included in the time requisite for obtaining the copy.

The relevant provisions of the Act and the Bihar Sales Tax Rules were considered in the judgment. It was noted that while the Act provided for the filing of appeals and revisions within specified time frames, there was no explicit provision for deducting the time taken to obtain a certified copy of the order. The judgment highlighted the absence of a specific provision in the Act or Rules for excluding the time taken to obtain a certified copy, unlike in the Income-tax Act, 1961.

The judgment delved into the interpretation of Section 12(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963, which allows for the exclusion of the time requisite for obtaining a copy of an order in computing the period of limitation for appeals or revisions. The court referred to precedents and legal principles to determine that the time taken in obtaining the copy, even if due to postal transit, should be considered beyond the party's control and hence deductible from the period of limitation.

The court specifically analyzed Rule 35(4) of the Bihar Sales Tax Rules, which allowed for making an application for a certified copy by registered post. It was emphasized that if the dealer complied with all formalities and made the application within the limitation period, the time taken by the postal department should be deemed beyond the dealer's control. The judgment concluded that there should be no distinction in computing the period deductible for obtaining a certified copy based on whether the application was made in person or through registered post.

Ultimately, the court held in favor of the assessee, ruling that the time requisite for obtaining the certified copy should commence from the date of application (3rd June, 1968), not the date of receipt by the authority (6th June, 1968). The judgment provided a detailed analysis of the legal provisions and precedents to support this conclusion, emphasizing the importance of considering the time taken in postal transit as part of the time requisite for obtaining a copy.