Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + SC Central Excise - 1979 (7) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1979 (7) TMI 87 - SC - Central Excise

Issues involved: Interpretation of the date of the order u/s 15 of the U.P. Motor Vehicle Taxation Act for filing an appeal.

The Supreme Court heard an appeal challenging the decision of the Allahabad High Court regarding the starting point of limitation for filing an appeal u/s 15 of the U.P. Motor Vehicle Taxation Act. The respondent sought tax exemption for his motor vehicle for a specific period, and the rejection of his request was communicated to him through a letter from the Taxation Officer via the Regional Transport Authority. The High Court ruled in favor of the respondent, considering the date of communication of the order as the relevant starting point for limitation. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, emphasizing the importance of the order being made known to the affected party for the appeal process. The Court highlighted that the order must be effectively communicated to the party, either directly or constructively, for it to have legal significance and trigger the appeal timeline. In this case, the respondent only became aware of the order upon receiving the letter, establishing that the date of communication was the valid starting point for filing the appeal within the prescribed timeframe.

The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's judgment, stating that the order must be communicated to the party to enable them to exercise their right to appeal. Merely recording an order in the office file is insufficient to impact the parties' rights; effective communication is essential for the order to be legally binding. The Court emphasized that the order's communication date is crucial for determining the appeal timeline, as the affected party must have knowledge of the order to take further action. In this instance, the respondent was unaware of the order until receiving the letter, making the date of communication the starting point for filing the appeal within the specified period u/s 15 of the U.P. Motor Vehicle Taxation Act. Therefore, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's decision without imposing any costs.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates