9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 912X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er dated November 28, 2006 made in M.P. No. 83 of 2006 with further direction issued to the first respondent to entertain the appeal filed by the petitioner against the assessment order passed by the second respondent in his proceedings dated June 27, 2006 and to dispose of the same on the merits as per law X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner to avail of the statutory appeal remedy along with the application for condoning the delay within four weeks, with further direction issued to the appellate authority to decide the matter on the merits. In compliance with such order, the petitioner filed the statutory appeal on October 6, 2006 after complying with pre-condition deposit of 25 per cent of disputed tax and admitted tax. The appeal is also filed along with an application for condoning the delay of 63 days. It is further stated in the same petition that the proceedings were pending before this court for nearly 27 days between July 5, 2006 to August 1, 2006 and if such period is excluded the total period of delay in filing the appeal is only 16 days coming within the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rit petition directing the first respondent to enter tain the appeal without referring to the period of limitation, the period during which the proceedings are pending before the High Court is also to be treated as delay and the delay petition is rightly rejected and the petitioner cannot raise any grievance against the same. Heard the rival submissions made on both sides. It is not in dispute that the petitioner availed of the statutory appeal remedy only on the strength of the permission granted by this court in the earlier writ petition and such permission is granted to file the appeal along with petition to condone the delay. Though the total number of delays from the date of the earlier order till the date of filing of the appeal is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6) P. Sarathy v. State Bank of India AIR 2000 SC 2023. The case dealt with by the Supreme Court is arising under the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, whereas the other cases dealt with by our High Court are arising under the same Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, in all these cases, our apex court and Division Bench of our High Court are of the categorical view that the period spent in the proceedings before this court under writ jurisdiction are to be necessarily excluded and the total number of delay is to be calculated after excluding such period and when the total period so calculated was less than the outer-limit prescribed under the relevant provisions of the Act, the Supreme Court and our High Court are pleased to condone th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
