2004 (1) TMI 668

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2003. Few facts material for deciding said appeal are mentioned herein below: Appellant is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958. Sales Tax Officer has passed an order of assessment against present appellant on September 1, 2000. Feeling aggrieved by said assessment order, present appellant preferred a revision before Deputy Commissioner, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of India before learned single Judge who after hearing counsel for the appellant came to the conclusion that the appellant had failed to make out good and sufficient ground showing its absence on March 20, 2002. Thus, authority had committed no error in rejecting appellant's application for restoration of revision. The learned single Judge has also found that it was not a case where any indulg .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Judge as also that of the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, dated April 10, 2003 and order dated March 20, 2002, cannot be sustained in law. If appellant's revision was to be decided ex parte, then at least same should have been considered on merits. It is also to be noted that when appellant on coming to know of dismissal of his revision, applied for restoration of the same then lenient vi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X