2015 (12) TMI 784 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Condonation of delay - Inordinate delay of 200 days - Held that - Admittedly, the appellate authority having found that the petitioner has filed the appeals with a delay of more than 200 days and also violated the 2nd proviso to Section 51(1) of the Act, which stipulates that no appeal shall be entertained unless the same is accompanied by satisfactory proof of the payment of the tax admitted by the appellant to be due or of such instalments thereof as might have become payable, as the case may be, and 25% of the difference of the tax assessed by the assessing authority and the tax admitted by the appellant and since the petitioner has not paid the same within a period of 30 days and also withina a further period of 30 days, rejected the appeals as not maintainable. - appellate authority did not dispute the veracity of the statement of the petitioner nor it was its case that the petitioner filed the appeals belatedly for certain malafide reason with a deliberate intention to delay the matters. The appellate authority also did not record such a finding. - Delay condoned.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging orders of the 1st respondent dated 13.08.2015 and connected proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 30.09.2014 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis:
The petitioners, civil works contractors and assessee, challenged the deduction of 2% as TDs by the Highways Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, while raising bills for work done on highways. They claimed an excess payment accumulated over the years, leading to a significant amount owed to them by the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent revised assessment orders based on discrepancies found during inspections, resulting in substantial tax and penalty levied against the petitioner under Section 27(3)(c) of the Act.

The petitioner filed appeals against the 2nd respondent's orders with a delay of 233 days due to the Accounts Manager's illness, who was responsible for filing returns and appeals. The 1st respondent returned the appeals papers for not being filed within the prescribed time limit, causing the petitioner to approach the court challenging this decision.

The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeals was due to the Accounts Manager's illness and not any malafide intent. The learned counsel for the petitioner requested the delay to be condoned and for the appeals to be heard on their merits.

The learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) contended that the appeals were rightly rejected by the appellate authority due to being filed beyond the limitation period.

The court noted that the petitioner filed the appeals after a delay of more than 200 days, contravening the provisions of the TNVAT Act. However, since there was no evidence of malafide intent or deliberate delay, and considering the interests of justice, the court decided to condone the delay and directed the appellate authority to hear the appeals on their merits.

Consequently, the court permitted the petitioner to re-present the appeals before the appellate authority within two weeks, complying with all requirements. The appellate authority was instructed to entertain the appeals and pass orders in accordance with the law. The writ petitions were disposed of with no costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.