9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (6) TMI 782X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g a tax revision case in T.C. M.P. No. 288 of 1999 and in all other cases to excuse the delay of 195 days in filing tax revision cases. In T.C.M.P. No. 288 of 1999 there is no appearance for the respondent. All these cases are taken up and a common order is passed because the issue involved is the same. In the petitions filed by the Government the assessee has filed a counter-affidavit through M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... annot excuse the delay beyond 90 days. Therefore, it is prayed that these petitions deserve to be dismissed. The same ratio applies to the tax revision case filed by the Revenue in T.C.M.P. No. 288 of 1999. 2.. We have examined the issue in detail with reference to decisions cited by Mr. P. Radhakrishnan. The first case is reported in [1988] 68 STC 84 (K. Ganesh v. State of Tamil Nadu). An ident ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court held that the proviso in the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act is an express provision relating to condonation of delay up to 45 days only at the relevant time. Accordingly, the Madras High Court held that the proviso in section 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act is very clear and it restricts the power to excuse the delay only up to 45 days. 3.. A second question may arise as to wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat all these petitions deserve to be dismissed because the petitions to excuse delay beyond 90 days is not permitted by the proviso to section 38(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. And this Tribunal doth further order that this order on being produced be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned. Issued under my hand and the seal of this Tribunal on the 14 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
