9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (8) TMI 195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ranchi. The three applications relate to the assessment of the firm under the Bihar Sales Tax Act for the assessment years 1962-63, 1963-64 and 1964-65. Adverse assessment orders having been passed against the petitioner, appeals were filed which proved futile. The petitioner thereafter moved the Commercial Taxes Tribunal in revision by three applications relating to the three assessment years. The revisions were dismissed by the Tribunal by judgment dated 6th May, 1969. The law enjoins filing of certified copy of the order passed by the Tribunal in revision along with the petition for reference under section 33(1) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959. The petitioner, therefore, applied for grant of certified copy for filing an application bef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad as follows: "Decision has been taken to make a reference to the High Court. Commissioner, Sales Tax, may be requested to make available the originals and the documents mentioned below." Long after recording the above order, the Tribunal by order dated 29th March, 1972, modified its orders dated 2nd September, 1969, and 10th December, 1971, and held that the reference applications will not be entertained on the ground of their being barred by limitation. The Tribunal specifically stated in paragraph 6 that the department has sufficient reason to request the Tribunal to review its order dated 2nd September, 1969, and the Tribunal observed that "which we hereby do". In paragraph 8, the Tribunal observed that "as it is not possible to st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1963, which reads as follows: "12. (2) In computing the period of limitation for an appeal or an application for leave to appeal or for revision or for review of a judgment, the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence or order appealed from or sought to be revised or reviewed shall be excluded." On the basis of the above provision it was contended that the petitioner was entitled to exclude the time taken in the grant of the certified copy. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance in this behalf upon Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. v. Madan Lal Das and Sons, Bareilly[1976] 38 S.T.C. 543 (S.C.); A.I.R. 1977 S.C. 523.The submission urged on b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... set out what questions were referred to the High Court, yet it does give an indication that the plea of the department that the application was barred by time had been rejected by the Tribunal. The reliance placed by the learned counsel for the respondents upon Commissioner of Wealthtax, Gujarat II v. Sayaji Mills Ltd.[1971] 82 I.T.R. 662. and Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal v. Income-tax Tribunal, 'D' Bench[1977] 109 I.T.R. 267., have no application to the present case. The order dated 10th December, 1971, shows in unmistakable terms that the judicial mind had formed the conclusion that the application was not barred by time. In that view of the matter, even if it does not contain the question to be referred to the High Court, yet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on beyond time under the mistaken notion that the time taken in grant of certified copy of the revisional orders would be excluded. Mr. K. N. Jain, the learned Government Pleader, who is well-acquainted with the procedure of Commercial Taxes Tribunal candidly conceded that it is the established practice of the Tribunal to exclude the time taken in grant of certified copy for purposes of limitation. It has been stated on behalf of the petitioner that before the Commercial Taxes Tribunal it had been contended firstly that the application was within time (on the basis that the time taken for grant of certified copies had to be excluded) and that even if it was not within time, the petitioner had acted bonafide in accordance with the legal advi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not an error apparent on the face of the record (see Budhram Kashiram v. State of Bihar[1970] 26 S.T.C. 505. and Thungabhadra Industries Ltd. v. Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, AnantapurA.I.R. 1964 S.C. 1372. Annexure-7 was, therefore, passed without jurisdiction and must be quashed. 7.. For the reasons stated above, the applications are allowed; let a writ of certiorari issue quashing the order of the Sales Tax Tribunal dated 29th March, 1972, contained in annexure-7 in each case. The Tribunal will now dispose of the reference applications filed by the petitioner. There will be no order for costs. U. C. SHARMA, J.-I agree. Applications allowed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - CST, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
