1980 (8) TMI 195 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
- Applicability of section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to proceedings before the Sales Tax Tribunal under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948.

Detailed Analysis:

The judgment pertains to three General Sales Tax References where a common question of law was raised regarding the applicability of section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to proceedings before the Sales Tax Tribunal under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee as barred by limitation, stating that the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act were not applicable to the proceedings. The Tribunal's decision was based on the belief that the amended provisions of section 20(4) of the Act, which restricted the time for filing appeals, would be applicable. However, the High Court clarified that the amendment to section 20(4) was prospective and did not apply retrospectively. The Court emphasized that an appeal is a vested right and should be viewed as a continuation of the original proceedings. Therefore, the Tribunal had the jurisdiction to condone the delay in filing the appeals if satisfied for the reasons recorded. The High Court directed the Tribunal to reconsider the case of the assessee under the provisions of section 20(4) of the Act as it stood before the amendment in 1967.

The High Court referred to section 29 of the Limitation Act, 1963, which specifies that the provisions of the Act shall not affect special or local laws prescribing different periods of limitation. The Court highlighted that the applicability of sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act to an appeal under a special statute depends on whether these provisions are expressly excluded by the statute. In this case, since the Punjab General Sales Tax Act itself allowed the appellate authority to entertain appeals after the expiry of 60 days for recorded reasons, the provisions of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay were not applicable. The Court noted that the Tribunal erred in concluding that the Limitation Act did not apply, as the Tribunal failed to consider the jurisdiction granted under section 20(4) of the Act prior to the 1967 amendment.

In conclusion, the High Court held that the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 were indeed applicable to the proceedings before the Tribunal. The Court directed the Tribunal to reconsider the case of the assessee under the original provisions of section 20(4) of the Act and condone the delay if satisfied. The judgment emphasized the importance of recognizing appeal as a vested right and ensuring continuity in the proceedings initiated under the Act.