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

TMI Blog

Home

1971 (7) TMI 137

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ground that the applicant was misled by the judgment dated 16th July, 1965, in Revision No. 4106 of 1959, M/s. Motilal Babu Lal, Bindki, Fatehpur, was sufficient to condone the delay in filing of appeals under section 5 of the Limitation Act." The material facts of the case are these: The assessee was assessed to sales tax for four assessment years. It appears that it did not pay the tax within the prescribed time. Accordingly a penalty order was passed. The penalty order was passed on 17th September, 1968. A copy of the order was served on the assessee on 5th October, 1968. Limitation for filing an appeal from the order is thirty days from the date of receipt of the order. So he could file an appeal on or before 4th November, 1968. On .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion were presented to the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) within the prescribed period of limitation. The answer to the question depends upon the meaning of the word "sent" in clause (1) of rule 67. Having regard to several considerations it appears to us that the word "sent" should be construed as "presented". If the word "sent" means really "presented" as we think, then there is little doubt that the memoranda of appeals given by the assessee to the post office on 4th November, 1968, were presented to the appellate authority within time. The marginal note to the rule sheds some light on the question of construction. The marginal note reads: "Appeal how to be presented." In other words rule 67(1) provides for the mode of presentation .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by the post office than to adopt a circuitous way of treating the appeal as being filed within time by resort to section 5, Limitation Act. In Popsing Rice Mill v. Income-tax Commissioner[1949] 17 I.T.R. 420; A.I.R. 1949 Orissa 53., an application for reference under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act was sent by registered post to the Appellate Tribunal within limitation. But it was received by the Appellate Tribunal after the expiry of limitation. The relevant rule prescribed that the application shall be made to the Tribunal by its being presented by the applicant in person or by an agent to the Registrar or the authorised officer or that it can be sent by registered post addressed to the officer concerned. There was a rule which expre .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates