2014 (7) TMI 446 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Revision application - Procedure for filing revision - filing of an affidavit of service - Service of notice not done properly - Held that - In case no such affidavit is filed and the assessee is not served by Commissioner of Trade Tax, meaning thereby there is no notice or opportunity to the assessee and revision has not been filed in the manner prescribed in the Rules. It is true that revision filed by Revenue, may not be dismissed for technical reasons, but where service has not been effected upon assessee for several years all together and Commissioner of Trade Tax apparently has failed to comply with the statutory requirement of filing affidavit of service, this Court finds no justification, still to continue with said revision to remain pending and give further opportunity to Revenue, after such a long time - This revision was filed in 2007 and till date affidavit of service has not been filed - it is fit case where this Court must reject revision having not been filed in accordance with rules and for non-compliance of requirement of Chapter 27 Rule 5(2) of High Court Rules - Decided against Revenue.

Issues:
1. Interpretation of procedural rules for filing revision under U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948.
2. Requirement of affidavit of service for revision applications.
3. Consequences of non-compliance with procedural requirements.
4. Dismissal of revision filed by Revenue for failure to comply with rules.
5. Justification for dismissing a revision after a long period of non-compliance.

Analysis:
1. The judgment deals with the interpretation of procedural rules for filing revision under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. It is noted that the procedure for filing revision is prescribed in Chapter 27 of the High Court Rules, which applies to proceedings under various tax acts, including the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. The rules provide for the filing of applications and affidavits of service to ensure proper notification to all concerned parties.

2. Rule 5 of Chapter 27 of the High Court Rules specifically requires the filing of an affidavit of service along with the revision application. The rule outlines the conditions for filing the affidavit, depending on whether the revision is preferred by the assessee or the Revenue. The absence of the affidavit of service can have implications on the validity of the revision filed, especially when filed by the Revenue.

3. The judgment emphasizes the consequences of non-compliance with procedural requirements, particularly regarding the affidavit of service. It is highlighted that if the Commissioner of Trade Tax fails to serve the assessee and file the necessary affidavit of service within the prescribed time frame, it may result in a lack of notice or opportunity for the assessee, rendering the revision invalid.

4. In cases where the affidavit of service is not filed by the Commissioner of Trade Tax and there is a significant delay in compliance, the Court may dismiss the revision for non-compliance with the rules. The judgment underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements to maintain the integrity of the revision process and ensure fairness to all parties involved.

5. The judgment concludes by justifying the dismissal of the revision in the specific case under consideration. It notes that despite the revision being filed in 2007, the affidavit of service had not been filed until the date of the judgment. The Court finds no justification to allow the revision to continue after such a prolonged period of non-compliance, especially when there is no dispute regarding the findings of fact by the Tribunal. Consequently, the revision is dismissed for failure to comply with the rules and lack of justification to continue the proceedings.

← Previous Next →