9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 1698 - SC - VAT and Sales TaxCondonation of delay in filing appeal - power to condone delay - applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 - Held that - Section 27 of the Act, 2002 provides a limitation of 120 days, with effect from the date of the Order appeal against, for filing an appeal to the High Court. No power of condonation of any delay that may have occurred is provided for under the Act - Section 80 of the Act, 2002, however, provides that in computing the period of limitation laid down under Sections 25, 26 and 27 of the Act, 2002 the provisions of Sections 4 and 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963, so far as may be, apply. Section 5 of the Limitation Act is expressly excluded by Section 80 of the Act. The order of the High Court condoning the delay in filing the appeal filed by the respondent-herein under Section 27 of the Act, 2002 must be held to be legally infirm - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Challenge to condonation of delay in filing Maharashtra Value Added Tax Appeal under Section 27 of the Act, 2002. Analysis: The Supreme Court considered the challenge to an order passed by the High Court of Bombay condoning a delay of 134 days in filing a Maharashtra Value Added Tax Appeal under Section 27 of the Act, 2002. The appellant contended that the Act, 2002 does not provide for condonation of delay and that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is inapplicable. However, Section 80 of the Act, 2002 states that the provisions of Sections 4 and 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 apply in computing the period of limitation under Sections 25, 26, and 27 of the Act, 2002, expressly excluding Section 5 of the Limitation Act. In a previous case, Patel Brothers Vs. State of Assam and Others, the Supreme Court had considered the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to appeals filed under the Assam Value Added Tax Act of 2003. The court held that when specific provisions make Sections 4 and 12 of the Limitation Act applicable, Section 5 of the Limitation Act is impliedly excluded. Therefore, in the present case, the Supreme Court held that the High Court's order condoning the delay in filing the appeal under Section 27 of the Act, 2002 was legally flawed. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and allowed the appeal.
|
