9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (9) TMI 394 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxMaintainability of petition - time limitation - Validity of Revision Order - challenge on the ground that the Revision authority had acted on the opinion of the audit party without independent application of mind - Held that - after the Tribunal passed its impugned order on 04.02.2005, the Government took no steps to challenge the same for close to 10 years when for the first time rectification application came to be moved before the Tribunal. This application was filed on 03.02.2015. Thus, for 10 long years there was no action on part of the department. It may be that the rectification application came to be dismissed by the Tribunal on 16.02.2015. Nevertheless, the delay has to be seen in light of the overall facts. Even after the Tribunal rejected the rectification application, the department took two years to move the present petition - petition dismissed on the ground of delay.
Issues:
Challenge to Value Added Tax Tribunal's judgment based on delay and laches. Analysis: The State Government filed three petitions challenging a common judgment of the Value Added Tax Tribunal dated 04.02.2005. The respondent, a dealer registered under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act engaged in manufacturing craft paper, had its assessment revised by the Revision Authority due to under assessment of turnover tax and nonacceptance of certain sales. The Revision Authority recomputed the tax liability, leaving a turnover ceiling for the year 1996-97. The assessee challenged this order before the Tribunal, which set aside the revision order on the basis that the Revision Authority had relied on the audit party's opinion without independent application of mind. The Government applied for rectification, which was dismissed due to delay. Subsequently, the Government took no action for close to 10 years until a rectification application was filed in 2015, which was also dismissed. Despite the dismissal, the department waited two more years to file the present petition. The High Court noted the significant delay of close to 10 years in challenging the Tribunal's order, with additional delay in filing the rectification application and the subsequent petition. The Court emphasized that the delay must be considered in light of the overall facts of the case. Ultimately, the Court dismissed all petitions on the grounds of delay and laches, highlighting the importance of timely action in legal proceedings.
|
