1987 (8) TMI 429 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Tribunal's order dismissing reference applications under section 44(1) of the Act for not being accompanied by certified copies of the Tribunal's order in second appeals.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the Tribunal's order dismissing reference applications under section 44(1) of the Act for not including certified copies of the Tribunal's order in second appeals. The Tribunal argued that the High Court Rules required certified copies to be filed, but the Act and Rules did not mandate the same for applications under section 44(1). The Court found that the Tribunal erred in applying High Court Rules to section 44(1) applications, as they are distinct from section 44(2) applications. The Court emphasized that the Tribunal already possesses the record in second appeal cases, negating the need for certified copies. The Court held that the Tribunal's dismissal of the applications was a manifest error of law, directing the Tribunal to reconsider the applications on merits.

The Court referred to Sangram Singh v. Election Tribunal, Kotah, emphasizing that procedural rules should facilitate justice, not penalize parties. The Court noted that section 38 of the Act requires appeals to be filed "in the prescribed manner," as per rule 57 of the M.P. General Sales Tax Rules, 1959. However, section 44(1) does not contain a similar requirement. The Court clarified that while certified copies are necessary for appeals and revisions, they are not mandated for section 44(1) applications. The Court highlighted that the Tribunal's reliance on High Court Rules was misplaced, as they do not apply to section 44(1) applications before the Tribunal.

In the final judgment, the Court allowed the writ petition, quashing the Tribunal's order and directing it to decide the reference applications under section 44(1) on their merits. The Court emphasized that no costs were to be awarded in this case. The decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory provisions and distinguishing between procedural requirements for different types of applications under the Act.