9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 537X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as regards receipt of the notices by the petitioner. However, the fact remains that the revision was preferred by petitioner and not by the Revenue and therefore it was the bounden duty of petitioner to be abreast with the dates of hearings. Since the Revision was filed by the petitioner it was his responsibility to be aware of the dates of hearing. The petitioner cannot pass on the buck to anyone ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Visoriya, Govt. Advocate ORDER 1. The instant petition preferred u/Art. 226/227 of the Constitution assails Annexure-P/1 by which the revision preferred by petitioner u/Sec. 62(1) of the M.P. Commercial Tax Act 1994 (for brevity 1994 Act) was dismissed for want of prosecution. 2. Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard on the question of admission. 3. The record in original ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /5. It is submitted that challenging Annexures-P/4 P/5 revision u/Sec. 62 (1) of the 1994 Act was filed but the same has been dismissed for want of prosecution by the impugned order dated 14/3/2005 vide P/1. 4.1 The sole ground raised by learned counsel for petitioner who has been heard at length is of denial of reasonable opportunity of being heard by the revisional authority, i.e. responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here is no endorsement as regards receipt of the notices by the petitioner. However, the fact remains that the revision was preferred by petitioner and not by the Revenue and therefore it was the bounden duty of petitioner to be abreast with the dates of hearings. Since the Revision was filed by the petitioner it was his responsibility to be aware of the dates of hearing. The petitioner cannot pas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
