9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 1050X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to condone the delay. The appeal was liable to be dismissed on the ground of limitation itself and that the appellant would not be caused any prejudice in further proceedings. - S.T.A. No. 32 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 7-7-2011 - SABHAHIT V.G. AND RAVI MALIMATH JJ. JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the assessee being aggrieved by the order dated January 15, 2009, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bangalore, wherein the revision initiated under section 64(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter called the Act ) is concluded by setting aside the order passed in appeals by the appellate authority and order passed by the Joint Commissioner in favour of the investigating officer which demands in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellate authority condoning the delay in filing the appeal which illegal and deciding the appeal on merits, when delay could not be condoned, should not be set aside. Reply was filed by the appellant herein contending, the delay has been properly condoned and the order of the appellate authority is justified. Therefore, no ground is made out for exercise of revisional jurisdiction under section 64 of the Act. The revisional authority by order dated January 15, 2009 held that in view of the provisions of section 62 of the Act, the appeal has to be filed within 30 days from the date of notice of assessment was served on the appellant and delay to the extent of 180 days, thereafter can be condoned under section 62(2B) of the Act. The ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed within 30 days from the date of service and delay of 180 days can be condoned. Therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant herein which was 277 days after service of notice of the person who was authorised to receive notice on behalf of the appellant, the appellate authority had no jurisdiction to condone the delay of 67 days in filing the appeal. Therefore, the order passed by the revisional authority setting aside the order passed in appeal and upholding the order of the investigating authority, is justified. We have carefully considered the contention of learned counsel for the parties and scrutinized the materials on record and the material on record would clearly show that there is no dispute that there was delay of 277 days ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
