9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 488 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxMaintainability of appeal - interpretation of statute - Section 28(3) of the Goa Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 2000 - time limitation - HELD THAT - The petitioner's Second Appeal is restored to the Tribunal in order to enable the Tribunal to consider and dispose of the petitioners applications for condonation of delay on their own merits - application disposed off.
Issues:
Challenges to orders made by First Appellate Authority and Tribunal regarding interpretation of Section 28(3) of the Goa Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 2000; Dismissal of application for condonation of delay by the Tribunal; Maintainability of appeals without depositing disputed amounts. Analysis: In Writ Petition Nos. 80, 81, 82, 83, and 84 of 2018, the petitioners challenged the orders of the First Appellate Authority and the Tribunal based on the interpretation of Section 28(3) of the Goa Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 2000. The First Appellate Authority had rejected the appeal on this basis, leading the petitioners to approach the Tribunal beyond the prescribed limitation period. However, the Tribunal, in its order dated 4th August 2017, dismissed the application for condonation of delay without considering the issue of sufficient cause shown by the appellant, essentially upholding the First Appellate Authority's interpretation. The Tribunal ruled that without the deposit or payment of disputed amounts by the petitioners, no appeals could be entertained. In the judgment disposing of Writ Petition No. 380 of 2019, the Court disagreed with the views of both the First Appellate Authority and the Tribunal regarding the maintainability of appeals under Section 28(3) of the said Act. Consequently, the Court set aside the Tribunal's order dated 4th August 2017 and reinstated the petitioner's Second Appeal to the Tribunal. This decision aimed to allow the Tribunal to properly consider and decide on the petitioners' applications for condonation of delay based on their individual merits. As a result of the Court's ruling, the Rule in each of the petitions was made partly absolute in the specified terms. The parties were directed to appear before the tribunal on 14th October 2019 at 10:30 a.m. to file an authenticated copy of the Court's order. All concerned were instructed to act in accordance with the authenticated copy of the order provided.
|
