2019 (12) TMI 468 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Review of order - Leave sought by the Petitioner to withdraw writ petition with liberty to file appeal against the order passed by the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal - power of Court to condone delay - HELD THAT - The Respondents seek to rely upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Superintending Engineer, Dehar Power House v. Excise and Taxation Officer, Sunder Nagar 2019 (11) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT to contend that there is a power in the Court to condone delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act even in an appeal filed under section 27 of the MVAT Act. Thus, it is a contested issue which could be considered at the hearing of the petition. The order id recalled - review petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Review of order granting leave to withdraw writ petition with liberty to file appeal against order of Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal based on subsequent Supreme Court decision regarding condonation of delay in filing appeal under MVAT Act.

Analysis:
The review petition before the Bombay High Court sought to reconsider the order passed on 21 June 2019, allowing the Petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with the liberty to file an appeal against the order of the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal. The Petitioner, through their counsel Mr. Raghuraman, argued that the decision of the Apex Court in a specific case highlighted that there is no provision under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, to condone the delay in filing an appeal under section 27 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 (MVAT Act). It was contended that the withdrawal by the Petitioner was not justified in light of this subsequent legal development.

The Respondents, on the other hand, relied on a different decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Superintending Engineer, Dehar Power House v. Excise and Taxation Officer, Sunder Nagar, to assert that the Court indeed possesses the power to condone delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act even in the context of an appeal filed under section 27 of the MVAT Act. This conflicting legal position presented by the parties created a contested issue that required the Court's consideration during the hearing of the petition.

Considering the arguments presented by both sides and the conflicting interpretations of the law, the Bombay High Court, comprised of M.S. Sanklecha and Nitin Jamdar, JJ., decided to recall the order dated 21 June 2019 and allowed the review petition in accordance with the prayer clause (a). This decision was based on the need to address the legal ambiguity arising from the differing perspectives on the power to condone delay in filing appeals under the MVAT Act, as highlighted by the parties during the proceedings.