K.Subramanian v. The Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribubal, Chennai
Case at a glance
- Bench
- P SATHASIVAM
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- TamilNadu General Sales Tax Act s. 31
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Part Road Circle, Erode.`` .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the first respondent in OPNo.319/2002…
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDated:- 12.10.2006Coram:-The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAMandThe Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.TAMILVANANWrit Petition No.24250 of 2002 & WPMP No.33344 of 2002K.Subramanian.. PetitionerVs.
The Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribubal, Chennai, rep. by its Registrar, Chennai-1.
The Tamil Nadu Sales-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Coimbatore-641 018.
The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT), Erode.
The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Part Road Circle, Erode.`` .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the first respondent in OPNo.319/2002 dated 02.04.2002 and quash the impugned proceedings of the first respondent and further direct the third respondent to condone the delay in filing the appeal and adjudicate the appeal on merits. For Petitioner: Mr.R.Venkatanarayanan for Mr.Subbaraya Aiyar PadmanabhanFor Respondents : Mr.Haja Nazirudeen, Spl. Govt. Pleader (T) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ORDER (Order of the Court was delivered by P.SATHASIVAM, J.)The above writ petition is directed against the order of the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal, Chennai, dated 02.04.2002made in O.P.No.319 of 2002, in and by which, the Tribunal, after finding that the petitioner has failed to file an appeal in time as provided, has dismissed the said O.P.2.
It is not in dispute that under Section 31 of the TamilNadu General Sales Tax Act, the appeal lies to the AppellateAssistant Commissioner, Erode, and the appeal has to be filed within a period of 30 days from the date on which the order of the original authority was served on him in the manner prescribed. Proviso to Section 31 gives power to the Appellate AssistantCommissioner, Erode, to condone the delay of further period of 30days, if there is sufficient cause. It is also not in dispute that after expiry of 60 days (30+30), the Appellate Authority has no power to condone the delay. The said view has been approved in series of decisions. In fact, the Appellate Tribunal has adverted to all those decisions and dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner. In view of the admitted legal position, we are in agreement with the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal. Consequently, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed.
No costs. WPMP No.33344 of 2002 is also dismissed.raaSd/Asst. Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst. RegistrarTo1.The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal, Chennai. 1.2.The Tamil Nadu Sales-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Coimbatore-641 018.3.The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT), Erode. 4. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Part Road Circle, Erode.+ 1 cc to Mr. Spl Government Pleader (T) SR no. 48094BS(CO)SR/31.10.2006W.P.No.24250 of 2002
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.