9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (6) TMI 529X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpugned order dated March 20, 2003, passed by the first respondent in O.P. No. 1102 of 2002. 2.. It appears that an assessment order was passed against the petitioner by the third respondent, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chennai, against which a first appeal was preferred by the petitioner to the second respondent, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner-CT III, Kuralagam, Chennai-102. The se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entertained. 4.. Evidently, the Special Tribunal rejected the petitioner's revision relying on the first proviso to section 38-A of the Act, which states: "Provided that every application to the Special Tribunal for the exercise of the powers under this section shall be preferred within such period as may be prescribed." 5. The Special Tribunal was evidently of the view that since no perio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 2004, though the same has not been notified. We are informed that the Special Tribunal is nonfunctional and hence, the matter cannot now obviously go back to the Special Tribunal. 7.. The petitioner had a right of appeal under section 36 of the Act and therefore, in the peculiar circumstances of this case, we direct that if such an appeal is filed by the petitioner within one month from today ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
