9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ling of application for rectification in the year 2004 has been admitted. While considering this appeal, it has come to the notice of this Court that the main amount which has been assessed i.e. ₹ 1,21,38,534/- is long back deposited by Challan dated 03.10.1994 and therefore, if the appeal is ordered to be heard on merits, no serious prejudice is likely to be caused to the department and it is settled position of law that when a substantial justice is pitted against technical consideration, the substantial justice must be given predominance and therefore, since the bonafides are appearing to be genuine, there is no likelihood of any prejudice to the department and the main reason assigned by the Tribunal is clarified by the departm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confirmed as per the assessment order, as stated above, and accordingly on 03.10.1994, the said amount came to be deposited. 3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid assessment order dated 30.07.1994, the appellants preferred an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner (Appeals)8 under section 65 of Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 on 11.10.1994. By that time, the amnesty scheme was floated by the Commissioner of Sales Tax Department vide its circular No.1189/480 dated 08.05.1991, which has provided that for pending assessment where the demand has been confirmed under section 15B of the Sales Tax Act, there shall not be levied any interest and penalty and in view of the that the appellant pleaded that no interest is payable and therefore, demand of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Though, the question of limitation was not arising, according to the appellant, however, for abundant caution, the appellant also filed an application seeking condonation of delay in preferring an appeal against the original order dated 30.06.2004. While preferring the said application for condonation of delay, it was specifically stated before the learned Tribunal that since the rectification application was very much pending, the applicants were under bonafide belief that if the said application is granted, possibly, there may not be an occasion to prefer an appeal and therefore, they were waiting for the outcome of rectification application's order and now since the final order is passed, under this bonafide circumstance, the delay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prefer an appeal. Be that as it may, now since the said application is unearthed and even department has stated and confirmed that such application was filed, the reason for rejection of delay condonation of application is not now remained germane. 4. As against this, learned AGP on behalf of the respondent authority stated that there is a long lapse of eight years and there is no plausible explanation available on behalf of the appellant and therefore, in the background of this fact, no interference is called for. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, it appears that the delay which has occasioned, is under bonafide circumstances. There appears to be no malafide intention behind it since the rectification ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
