9911796707
TMI Blog1969 (8) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e exemption order and the other against the assessment order. Their prayer was that they were entitled to get exemption on the turnover of foodgrains of the entire year or at least from 30th July, 1958. They challenged the assessment order on the ground that the tax determined was excessive. The two appeals were disposed of on 30th of April, 1961. M/s. Badri Prasad Ayodhya Prasad filed two revision applications before the Additional Judge (Revisions) on 23rd June, 1964, challenging the appellate orders passed by the appellate authority on 30th April, 1961. The delay in the filing of the revision applications was explained by the aforesaid assessee by saying that they did not receive copies of the appellate order and that they received the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relating to limitation provided by the Act dealing with the matter. The question of limitation is, therefore, one of law. Sections 10(3)(i) and 10(3-B) of the Act read: 10.. (3)(i) "The revising authority or any additional revising authority may, for the purposes of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any order made by any appellate or assessing authority under this Act, in its discretion, call for and examine, either on its own motion or on the application of the Commissioner of Sales Tax or the person aggrieved, the record of such order and pass such order as it may think fit:......................................................................................" 10.. (3-B) "The application under sub-section (3) sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k fit..................An application by the person aggrieved is required to be made, vide sub-section (3-B), within one year or if the Judge (Revisions) allows for sufficient cause, within one and a half years...............An order under sub-section (3)(i) can be passed by him only after he calls for the record and he can call for the record only after he has entertained the application, if made more than a year from the date of the impugned order, on sufficient cause being shown. Sub-section (3-A) requires that a copy of the order passed by him under sub-section (3) must be served upon the applicant and an application under section 11(1) is to be made within 120 days from the date of this service of the order. Not only must the applicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 31 and an appeal lies from that order to the Appellate Tribunal. In my opinion, therefore, M/s. Sukhan Lal Amar Nath v. Commissioner, Sales TaxS.T.R. No. 556 of 1961 decided on 18th February, 1963. does not lay down correct law. I answer the question referred to us by saying that the question whether a revision application under section 10(3) of the Act was rightly dismissed as barred by limitation is a question of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal passed under section 10(3)(i) of the Act and for that reason a reference can be made by the revising authority to this court under section 11 of the Act. I would direct the parties to bear their own costs. SATISH CHANDRA, J.-I agree. GULATI, J.-I agree. Reference answered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
