Loading...

Karnataka State Financial … vs The Dy Commr For Transport on 13 November, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Karnataka State Financial … vs The Dy Commr For Transport on 13 November, 2009
Author: P.D.Dinakaran(Cj) & Shantanagoudar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT 
DATED THIS THE 13" my OF NOVEMBER, 2009
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE N\R.P.D.DINAKARAN,   
AND V' L   %
THE HON'BLE MR.JusTIcE MOHAN  

WRIT PETITION No.97'91%/2005.  
C/w. WRIT PET£TIQf\i'Nos.3'?V44/'2'CO:?;T.q?1~O35/ECO?
An;L;OE916i;2%007;gTRMvTE3 1;" M 

IN W.P.i\I'O§979A:1"j{2(i6é"i":  
BETWEEN: ' 4' T ' H V

Ka1'I'1211:aka. S é,:;_1'{.e. l*'i1'1.<_11'1(:jE1E «  
C()Fp()AI"'dvf_iOI"1.. Rz.EJ.i,z1ji1'12ig21i'
 E3rz:1r'2Oh. NO 197, §"<E';.1_I____I?.Ev(')1'
'- . " 2 "51 Si'. 2.1gét..' 'Rzij ;.gji1"1ag211'
 1_ W of C}m1'ci_ RO__eTc'i
" £3a:'nga'R:6O 
B3.'-'-- iig,/\ssi'sf,2-3mf::Ge11.da1'I11.z1'1.hy', Adv.)
  1. }Th(* D€pL11_v CO11'1missi(:me1* fur'

V  "'I'r2-11"1:+sp(:)1'1.. I3a1'1g'z--:l(.)1't? I')1'v1'siOn



 

3.

n
I J
.

V iS1lwess1’1w:;-1.1’a1i.a11 “Fowe1*s
D1′. Ambedkzla’ Road
Ba1’1ga-1]01’e–560 00] .

The Assisi.z-1111. Regi():’1z1I “E’1*2111ss;:)o1’i.
Officer. R21j21ji:1agar

132113 ga11()1’€ \Vesi. Ij3a11’1ga]o1fe.

NK. Muraii

Aged about 46 years

R/O N0.-406. 12″‘ Main

§\/Eanj L1nat.h11e1gaI*

Be111gal0re–56O 010.

S. Ruc1rapp.a1

S/0 Siddaiah

Aged about 52 years . «
R/0 No.U.’/9, MEG C0}r3~ny_ V
SI’i1’€iII1£1pL11′?Ei’1’=A, I V’ i

Banga101’ef$._5O ..Resp0nde’nts

{By Sri B; V\:’&3.e}’£f;51)’p.é:i:ii;.;!\GP..;.€ ‘fof R2)

111:3 Wm 15e:$;:;;.§:-nvgg’4::::’ec1’mclerArmies 226 & 227 of the

COI’1S1iT.L1i,i'()j{1″QIN ‘1I1dia”{;>rayiiT’;g” to quash the impugned order
dzzicid 23»1’I>:2004 pz1Sséd.._..by R] Vidfi’. An’I1eXu1’e–A and order
C1E1’fi€’,C1:v2-2»~_A} I«»20Q3p2is.5€-d by R2 vide Annex1.1r€–I3.

. “LN W’;’I;.N59; 37.44/200%'”‘:”‘ A

~

K211’ 1:}at2.1}<;1. S1.'-ate IndL1st.1"i.a1
I11ves'i;me—-nt. [)eveI0pII1eI1.t:

, ‘ V .C01’;o()1’£-‘. {.1611} L1 (1. .

,f:3y :i1__s Mé1’112igcr
_ V’ ‘ .”I€g11’1ij;}1 B h avan ”

__ Rm». ‘C01.11’5e Road
B2§.1’1g211c)1’e -5630 001.

..I–°c:t.i{.i0ner

{By Sri Puttigc R Ramesh. Adv.)
AND:

1. Joint. Commissioner for
‘Fr211’1sp0rt’ (Bangalore Urban
8»: Rm’;-11) No.36, MS1L E-i()L1se
6″‘ F1001″, Cunningham Road .

Banga1or€~560 052. I

2. T116 Assist:2m'{‘ Regional} ‘I’rans;p_or1.

Officer and Taxation Auth01*1*.’.y
R.’F.O.. Bangalore Central v . :

E{or21n’1angLLE21, Banga1Q1*e–34. _._.Resépondents

(By Sri B. Veerappa. AGAI; fqr. R1
This \V1’it;*’Péi*:.i_L:i<)'1: L112.c§éf_';&rfib§eS 226 & 227 of the

C0m3tiiutio11_. .~:w'i5" = prayr1'u11g quéiéh the order dated
17.1.2007 of th:c" R1 "at Ari.n(iX=._,1VrAAe-Eb' in Appeai N0s.5.6,7 8: 8

(TAX) /2o05eQ7z._
us: w.P.N¢..4o.35/200%.: "

§z:21;v5z_E§_I$
V’ E;1f1gine£x:”r’ ———- -« ”

~. iizmgaitzliizx N4ée.1fav21ri Nigam
‘ Ltd “1’/1I;i<3CC"D?iV'– .

:9-39;’? %Nav-mu .j1fee.’rju~1′
E3e1gga’un1.. ..Pe’i,iti01’1er

__(By Sn. Bha1’a1E;h Kumar. Adm.)

C

‘ 1;; Deputy Comrxaissioner for
Transp0rt:, Belgaum.

2. Cc)m1’ni5sio1’a20O’5

respemively.

IN W.P.NO.10910/2007 :

BETWEEN :

Karnataka State Finar1cia._1_
Corporation, No. I} /1 _’
Thimrnaiah Road V
Banga1ore~560 05:2′ A ‘

By its Assistani.’ Gc}1%:*.Ve;’::_I’IX/1a1h2iger’§’ ..Petition€r

{By Sri i*1en’a£;§;t’, }’§dV.,)

AND:

1. The Rcgional “.’ré1ti._s;)o’r.L_:of{fi(:e1′
Mysore “i~’)4i.=3″ufi(:1,;’ Myso-ltd

2. I~221gE1u_ V . A ‘
/’*9 B__. C . VR211o1aégo1__.1_cia;

. VG’a11igé£1’z1M’3t.reet

‘ ‘E3a1111_LV1V1″~ o’I’oxim.__
Niyso1f€~..D’isfa<ict.

3.” AS.'”Ra1:1’1a;c:haiidra
S’/o S_iddeg;§C_CVfl

1.6-8-2006 issued by Rl vide Ar1nexL1re~L. the Cl€1′{1’c1I1L’l.>lTO€iQé*,
issued by the RI dated 8~9~2006 vide A1mexu1’e~_l_\{i””‘an;1..__th+;_V
order of the Appellate Authox-it,y dated 30~l.

An11ex’ure–P.

These Writ Petitions are eomingloniihrjj.heaitixigl ‘on
day. MOI-{AN S}-iAl\lTANAGOUDAR, J., delivered l1;.llvc»wi’r_1_’g:._-.

Jvnemggg
Learned Single Judge havixnglfeltt the deietfim laid
down in the ease of ~–vs~ SENIOR

Rnxmmmeammnmfliwdmxmewjmmms

I'(;’C0I}SiCi€I’€t’Cl()l}…T5. refei’1’e’d.AVl”‘ t.he.:Se”lw1’it petitions to the
Division Bench unvde’1f~_lSe.eti0n;~ 9 of the Karnataka High
Court Aetg,

QJ:a.w’i~l13.__.th,e ease’e.f.~CihinnaveI1kates1i (SL1p1″c1}. learned

Sl’i’iflggiwe Court has ruled that Section 5 of the

l .’,Limit’at_ibn Aeil1iVei:;11(>t. applicable to the appeals filed under

-<.l.l'_j3.«Se(:ti0n 15 Ct" the Karnmtaka Motor Vehicles 'l.'axati0r1 Act,

( hereinafter referred to as ".l'axati0n Act.' for short)

V'

,(1_

r/w. Rule 31 of the Karnataka Motor Vehicle Taxation

Rules. 1957 [hereinafter referred to as 'Taxation

short).

3. Thus, the question to

Division Bench is

” \Nhether Sectiori 5 of”the’Limitatilotii-.A:3t
is applicable for lloottitjlonirig the
delay in preferring,»~–th_e:’» under
Section 15: ‘j-‘Mot.olr Vehicle
Taxatiorili 31 of the
Ka1rr1’atai:a;”;p.l\/lotor ‘”.’l\.l/9ehiel’ew.Tl’axatio11 Rules,
issitautlll pl ‘ l’
And eo’t:1pseqtier1tl3.f?’ V”

p it ‘\7Vl’1€tll”1&’._Il_’Ill’1(3 ratio laid down in the Case
l.C’htr1rtaper11ealtésh R. T. -us- Senior RTO.
reported in 1975 (.2) KLJ

‘l A be interfered with ‘?”.

AA 3. u-Tlihe facts in these writ petitions are almost
lrgoinlmori. The petitioners herein have filed appeals before

it ‘:l_4t’h»e—{prescribed Appellate Aut.horities under Sectjori 15 of

g€

‘L,§

the ‘l’axat:io1’1 Act, 1’/w. Rule 31 of {lie ‘i’axat:io1’i Rules,

questtioiiing the ctorreetness of the notices/orders.._isetied

by the original eu.1tli()rit’ies. Si1Cl’1 appeals are”fi.1’ed__”with

certain delay. Thus, the appellants before*vt-ljieyr’espec:i:.ive.

Appellate Authorities i.e., the ‘A.’l:ierei§f1–..A filed

applieatrions under Section 53 (:i:th_e Lin’1ite1t:ioriv.;f1xet.Hprayingg.L’

for condonation of delay ih_’:lV”i”ilirig_v tl1.e”«appeVais. The
Appellate Authorities Fiaye appeals on the
ground that thee’-appeals”ai4e vflled_vbveyr_§hd the prescribed

period of 3Ga13r:;l._y_t,h_at*..” has no jurisdietiori to

QTOIICIOIIZE5″AvT§lCl&ti:t4VV’irjrlfillillg appeal. ‘l’hc)ugl’1 the

Appellateflta quoted t.he j’L1dgn1er1i: of this

Court1′.€P0rted.:Vi11Vthe.”-eaee of CHINNAVENKATESH RT. wus-

“.;=;I3Nie}2 ?–R’I’O.._ iwi/srjke ea-, ANOTJ–JER ( 1.9 75 (21 KLJ 385}.
their orders, seem to have followed the
._ ;~atio’~«.__laid’ ‘d.(;’).;i>’VAl1 in the said judgment. while passing the

‘ ‘ é ” li”1’1.p3,,lgI} ed e1*de:1’s.

W

4. Ii’. re1eva11’11 to 1’1ot<;=. the prm-'isi<:)r1s oi' SC(.?I1i()I1

29(2) of the I.,1111it21Ei:2;1t’i()n –..fL})’.r:_.vthe

purpose oi’ disposal of thcrsc-2 writ. petiti(ms–.~-~.–._ .

Section 29(2) of

Where any special res(jri–iJéd “fork;
any suit’. appeal or 21;9:}.jii(é21t4i§.)1’i—.§a’=.pt:1~iA6:1VMbf
limi1at:ior1 difi’e1’e_ui. i’1′();1’1——tV}§_’Lc. 15d
by the Sc7hedL1lVe’;~ 1he Section 3
shall apply’ as if S[_L’Vl:.(‘IfhV ‘£116 period
}’)1’L->53c:1’iL7<-?'('.E' :1.}1<;_: for the:
p.L1–1*pr)$:§ei_V'.' ;<3'.;'i5:;; eu'1_v period of
fa-'r any suit, appeal or
ap'p1j(§aVti<j11._'iii:fi4i'13,f 5§5ecia11 or local law. the
.1"J,1'1.iSv..601’i’i..a1ii’i.é(Ji in St;:(:€io1’1s 4 to 24
V’Si*1a-«’1-}”e1;3g31y only in so far as, afid to
to which, they are not expressly

%.r:X(:If’u.dcd’by s1.1cl’1 1.)c=’:~.ciaE or 1(.)(fa}. Eaw.”

” Sc{5nI:i(§1T1 15 of the ‘I.’axa.ti<)1'1 AC1 a.1ne1'1dc(.i by Act.

» 'Nx()§T8«-..;)i' 2007. Sec:t:i0n 15. p1'i()r to amendn1e1'1f. and

st}:bseqL,m=:1'1i; to arnc_=1'1ci11'1c?111. reads E']'11.£$ :

V'

,9,

Before 2-u11e1'1d1nem :

Section 15 of the Taxation Act : (I’rior’e’te’e._

amendment) Appeals : Any person,

z1ggriex»’ed by any 01’de.1″ of a Taxation A<!(.11[.}1(}17.it}'

made under this Act. _~me_y .'x.¥\ri£,1"1"ir*.']

prescribed time and in the '»pr€:_S'C1.'§'be'd xnéirlxiefr-;..

appeal to the p1"€SCI'ibVf:3e(f.'_ElLiE,}'iO1'ii.:,'."

After 21men.ci_m.em_': :

Section 15″–.-ix “;–§fj Any person

who is e1gg3;1*ie\reci….19y’anyercler t5=f7.ga”Taxe1t.ior1

Auth01’i1″y’ “m-fiicle”–_m’3cl’e1″ “t:11ViVs-V”A<':.t.§ may within

the }=i)i'es.C:;."i:l'3"eéi V the prescribed
r3ié:1iiT£1e1.{§5.a}3p§eéil pres'C.1'ibed authority.

4(2) ["ci')."VL\¥:.(AV)' shail be e1'e1te.e1'{;ai11ed by

the e1ppe1Ié:1ce"v_'£i.L1f',I1()1'ity unless it is

J:"?.aegfor1}pa11ieci. …. by sat.isfae1.()1"y proof of the

_V pa.y:.11':9%V1':i'i.. ef the tax not ciis_1:)1,z1.c:<E in the appeal.

Net \vit1_1s1,a1'1dingthat an appeal has

' bee,11 Vpreferred under sub~seCt,ion (1.), the tax

' 0r"0t,he1' am0un1_ shall be paid in ac:eo1'd2mee

..5wii'ch the order again_st' which the appeal has

been preferred :

V5

-3%}-

Pmvi(.1ed t”E’12’1l. the. appeiie-11.0 aL11″h()1*ii’.y

may, in its dis(:re141’or1, give d1’1’eCt;i()11s as ; f13,

thinlszs fit. in re,ga1_’d to the payment. of t.11t5«»t:2″1-:«<4f:_ "

or other amount: payzaxbie Lmder (i1e1:.:se;Ef«~ (¥.)y)A,""if

the applicemt ftlrnishes s1.:fif}veie1'1t .:~3'ec:u.i'_ivT,y"'»f,0*_

its satisfaction in such iforn1y'2:I1d_ =_su..<:l_1V

manner as may be presC1'ibe($__.

{3} Any appeaf ‘=p’1’efVe1*1*e(/i– ” :aI’i;e1’ V} the
prescribed pe1’i0e1’shal?Vbeuciziemigsed. A H

Rule 31 f”v’ea;~f1″_e. c;1fd’e._1j” sL.1c11 persorl, appeai

to. –

Ii} 1:i*’:-:’:V Depuiy C(>1nn1iss_si()ne1- for

,V’_I’:iafr’1sp(51*I._._ if the 01_’igi1’1a.l order is that” of an

“-‘.__yc)f’i’iz5e;f__(:~fif1er than the C0n’1m1’ssi0ner and the

{f)evp’v..ty’ Com_m1’ssioner for ‘I”ransp01.’i:, and

Provided that if the originai order has

-‘been passed by the Deputy Comlnissioner for

T ‘ar1sp()1*1″ himseff in s01″\’j:?/>0t:}1e,r eap2″1Cii:y

..1;..

appeal a.g2.1i1’1st such c)rigi1″1a1 order shall lie to
the Commissioner.

(ii) the Ke1r1’1at/aka: Reve1mc~ Ap;3e:–E–1§1t’..e}’_L’ , ”
‘l’ribuna].. if the original order that _i;}11.€3L’ ‘M
C0n1n1issi0n_er or the {)epm1:y…Cc)mmiSsi:>nér

for T1″‘c1l’1S})(‘)!’1..

5. This Court in the =’ié1′:.+¢ of ‘C1’1iIlf1ClL’é’.f’1.KC?.K'(§’Sh§ (cited.

supra} 11213 rulec.i that SeCt:io.:’1 _E_3_ ‘o.f_1h_c Limi.tat.i0n}Act is not
app}ic:ab1e to appeals”– «filed? ‘%;n1d”€;ifV”~ nSe_Cti0n 15 of the
Taxation Act 0n_’the g1?()'”u’r:*d ‘t}’1’2zt:’=1j.11eV’ta12&i»f”1g auth01″i’r.ies are
:1’1e:’e]yj’t.’h”L*”iT1’1.§s,1.1″1if{&i:'(~:1’iga,1’i’ties Ei’i””1_:}fic State and do not forrn
part. of the 3′.udic:ié1:*y., Ivz.1 (:;1″._V; fit’:l:1 1’J.£)V1’i'{.iC::i (‘%2{a’1.1″1()t be tree~11’c(:I t’h€;: Cc)1[1r14s of

“–Ci\fi! J1fu:’..i(%22t.:111*c:. “””

=71 for detem1i1’1i:’1g wh_et;her the a.uth_ori1:ies

a1*e’i71iI1cét.id;1if:g as the Court. or not has been laid down by

21 of the de(?isic)1′}.s of llhf-,’. Apex Court. To avoid

:*c1VJLér1.§t4i(‘>11. \vc: Inay :*ei’c~:1* ’10 0116′, 0f£.I”1em. i.€.. in the case of

V’?

.13,

THAKUR J UGAL KISHORE SINHIA –vs- SIT I CENTRAL
COAOPERATIVE BANK LTD., (AIR 1967 SC 1494).;”‘–§n this

n1211:t’er._ the Apex C(;)zm, was (‘.()1’1C€I’I1€d with » V’C’1L1*esi:épr1

as to whether’ the Assistzmii Reg1’st.rar of’._CQ}0perati\{e’

Societies 1’unCti(e)11_i1’1g m’1de1′ Sec’jf.i(‘)1″1″48 ‘;r__>f ‘};~5V:h%a;r ahd ‘

Orissa Cov0pe1″au’ve Sc)Ciet,ies AC1, “‘1935,»..”.;wa’sC(>uf’t»

s1.e1b()1’din’a.{‘,e to the High ‘v'(3′.(:)’£,.11’1 f01’*._ f):’;.1:’pose of
Comempt of Courts 1952:. ‘W}a,iVie..answeriAng the said

question in the affirmaf,iye,~..ti1e relied upon the

j1,:dgment in SINHLA —-vs- JYOTI

NARAIN’ :.SC:”66 )f”Wv11e:’ei11 it is observed in

Pa1’ag:’ei’phi–i’1 are the essential tests

Qf’ a._ ;’ud.:’c1’c1l prorLourlcenelent, ”

V47

I1 is 1’e.1evz:1m to 1101.6 a.110t1’1e1′ ci1eeisi<)n 0f.th*eA_pex

Ccmrt in the ("use VIRINDAR KUMAR -'-.–__Ijs~_V

STATE or PUNJAB (AIR 1956 see _1 53};'"'wii¢:1~é1nf,

observed thus :

It may be lg; Agm.I_1aI_:\§
disi’ir1guishes a court _ a
tribunal is that e’I’iarged :11;-»=._1″Ie}1 adduly to
decide disputes a’r}’w,.”d’fIs?ir3,I111er’ and
declares ‘I_da”1:e__ r*ig}1′{s” {Iii definitive

judgmeflt. §l”To _dec}!_de ;’_:V1x_ a ji.’:;::’i:icial manner

i{:1’baI’L:e.si;-V “-i.f’ie_:’*p’ariies’*'”are ermfiled as a
rfzvazzls-,” —i1e’a.rd. in support Q/” their
<'*ioL«1'm 'arld'-ta"acgidtzeex'evidence in proof of it.
:w:1r'1d ::"'azg§o Vifrlpe-:'t's".czr'1 obligation on the part. Q/'
a;:i}1a'f*f{_r}"'*"to decide the ma.I.Ier on a

—co;issidei*a.I_ior1 Q)” {he evidence adduced and in

” -__’cLe’cd_rfd(1r;1ee M,ai.1.I1 law. When a qu.esI.ion

1.i1V.e’z’ej’a’r’e arises as to whether an auU1ority

saicl Act. has C’.(.”).i]’}C up for consic1cra.1′.i()_i1 at difih>.1″c-311E. times

L1.:’1c’ic1′ ch f11=.1″c21’1 E”. an iiies.

The C0m11iissi()1″1e1″ who has been 21’ui;h.<)if1ze'c1,:to 2

e\-'i(1e1'1(:e 01' the wilxiesses. has bcmi 1?;-eiE..c'1f t.o.b<~:. 51- (",'(')i,:'l'~1T"_{' {E336

Jyoti Narayan vs.Brijnan'dV_c'm__ Sifthfu ihafnfii.

289]. The Rent: Cont;_r()I1er 21 Court
[See G.B1.1lliswamyV AIR
1 976 Andhrqé _::P':f§:1d£::.§li" . _ .:i?:3'1<;§.cti01'i Tribunals
have beezn Chand 'vs. Sri
All.L.J. 5 at page 7).

C()rc);1ei’:3 Cari be adduced have been

lieldto V..cF-<)iir1s"': [See Tanajirao Martinrao

."'-Ka?i££imbar'zde H.J.Chinoy: 71 Bombay Law

In Brijnandan Sinha vs. Jyoti Narain:

66, it. has been held Eihat: any ‘I’ribuna} or

‘ “a;Li1i;.Lh()ri’i;y”‘ whose decision is final and binding b€T,VV(?€F1 the

p21i’–ii£*.s is 21 court. In tthc: said dt3(‘TiSi.(.”)11, the Supreme

” “‘COl,1I’1,.. while cimriciiiig E1 CEISE? 1,1i”1d€I’ C<)u:'i, of Eriqu1'1'y Act.

V'?

— Eh »
hclcl 111211. 2-1 c0m’1 of cé11q1.1ir’y is not” .21 (‘wart as its C1€(TiSi()I’1

1T1ciil’1cr fine’:.11 nor 1′)i.11cii:’1g L:p01″1 the pa1’t.ies. I.n ‘-Vindar

Kumar Satya vs. State of Punjab: AIR

U10 SL1]l)1′(‘:’.H](‘, C(_)1n’t: has mach: (;1Wb1′()’c1(i’.VCi’1″S1.:i_F1Cifiv()1’1 u2’1′

court and quasi judicial T:”ibL11’1a}I~.

As could be so§;1:1 f1*c>1:11. :vf§’u.J(%r,31 {.ij;.};1Lt_\ijiarnataka
Motor Vehicles ‘£’axatio}1 appeal lies to the
Dcputxy C0111:”:i:§:2.$i(.)r}:(§i’V’L’ or to the
Revenue Appellate
T1’ib’:,1 I’1ié51’I Wei E51; 11 if Ea V Kart} at aka Revenue
A13}.)el1a ife two members, one of which

is 21 Judicial'”Memberof f)ist.1″i(:i. .JL.1(ige Caclre.

_V’i’%1e~.Vt{21i*n;11’e’1.l<21 Motor Vehicles 'l'ax2=1t:io1'1 Act. 1957.

xxf2wAs"–é1'1a(tiT–i%§i fii-vi1.h an i1'1{€1"111'cm to b1'it'1g 2111 u11ifo'rm rate

'.V$t.1*1.1(':1.1,1:*e.. 1;h_r0u§.j§1mut the State and to consolidate and

C_'2:.11n'cé'n.{i the law 1'eE2'-1Ei1'T1g in iervy of tax on motel' vehicles in

' 1.11:3 S£.a{:e of Ka.mataka. '.I'hr-3 pmvi;-3ir_)1'1s ()fI1'1e Act clearly

W'

K-J

. |,t_
p(_)st.u1.a1_e iiiai. 1.1'i<-=2 State of Kar1iat'.a1“‘

can be said to be a D()Ii’1C’.S'[§iCiA.:’Ti*iibL1Ii’£11f “=___.

member/members oi t11e,<appel1e1're 2.a.i.1t'1i2'orii.y.__ar_e not:

nominated by the parties. 'i"he__€i-ispuutexniisdo nofi have any
control over their appbi!'Ait.1Tif:1'1'i,.' ; 'appe11at.e authority
may reject the ap-D6211 atthe":1i'1*eei1}oik;i.i the power to

summon i'e.C-oi*rjs§l;_V__ifi. 'I'1{¢)_S_ C,l.isCifei[io11 to give directioras as it

thinief0re it. The appe1’1:;2,tEE~V..a1atllbliity .h;cLI’S ii’Q”Cie:’i.ér111iIie

the iis. If 1119 Aplacéllapze E1’C(§1;1.1’L- §{h€l1 sub-
Section (2) of Scc:t.i01§ ;f&fi_f:!’ Act, would
apply. As it ._g1 for the
iegis1a1,L1re Section 5 of the

I,in1it’z2’1fi_(_):’1._ ~A(jVtV;;X1.963 sj§’cC1fifi%ally. In HIE-IT. View of the

1’n21.t’:Ic1:_ EU}’fléillpliffé-Ui(‘)1’£” _{‘1″_;1c’Ie1* S<:~(:ii<")k 2,11, Sc'(.'11i01.1 29(2) of rm-~ I_,imita_I,1'oz1

Act -2:g.*vcai~:*. 'that the f<)11c')wi11g' iwo 1'c'=:qui1'e111c11ts have to

A "r39: se1l;4is'§7iéd by the 2-u.1tho1"ity i11v0ki1*1g the said ]T)l'OViSiOD

_ £019' i:1:.1p(_)rI":i11g t':.}'1c: n1a. pmvisi01’1s <'r0r11",2:i11(:d in

= S.ei:i",i(')1'1s 4 to 24 of the L:'mit.a*.':io1'1 ACE :

V'?

,gl_).

{:1} ‘I’11c’r(: m1.1s1 be 21 1’)1*(‘.>visi<)r1 for 1:)e1'i()§i
of lin'1:'1_a.Eio1'1 1.m(.k'r any .5'p(".('.i.21.lH.
local law in cc)1me(11'i()11 with
appeal or applicatioll. '

(1:3) '1'he s2:1i(1 p1'e._e5<t:'_i1.::-:1'iun_ '<_)jf Y;.)<}iji'<'x_?1"–..0rfV f
Iimi121t1'0n uncké1* suCfh_ special 01f"E~o(~t21I'=, '

law' should VE)-g§'~..__éiiI'fef(;:1t' .jf19o:Ii"~-jtiie

period 1')1'L==:s<3z'ii3§j_g_1u""by=.:1'1e scr"h.e,c111I_<f: to

t'I'1e i',ia11ii..af'i–.11 7_A(:1, .. ”

If the g1.€<j;4CSaiCE;A 1'_,c-.*4(7;:'§«,:11'1".¢f'1~';L-ff:-'_1t,S7arc satisfied, the

<:(m.sc;:q1.1c'-rm13$Sc<:1:.i01T1 29(2) of the
E._i1.;1%1a1i,ig:);a ._ , "3111 'iir'§111:11.i(::a1%y fol E ow. Th ese
(.'.<)r1 seq 1,: 3; 1*} ' IV
in ____ (',E1fr5(.'.. Scittiiun 3 of the
,, 4',,i:.ji,A.;i*13'tj;1*'{,i<)11 Act. wo:.,11d apply if the
p1'CS('1'ibt'd by l'.hc,' spercial <31' 10<éa._1

law was the period presc1'1'bed by the

rschedule.

W

“:11”

(ii) For clet:e1’111i1’1ir1g any pe.ric)d of limitaticm

p1*cs:(‘1’ib(‘:cl by 51..tl:i’1 .<5pc=:<'ti2-1l 01' lcmal
for a suit, appeal or application _;.

pI’OVlSlO11S (:()11tai11l11g V >SMe(:l.io13~:x ~ _
[i1’1c:.lusive§) would ezmsly A’
the extent to V wl}zi(:hV”‘-.I.licy

expressly excl1.1dec__l “‘by -.51.1cli’ :«_*,.})§~,c:i::1vl? or

local law.

10. In tlie light:…nl_”*VI.l1e 21l'(>f’eséii€ji”‘fianalysis of the
relevant __es §i3’l”_Seci’£:id;i1V29(2). Vollf VtV1l’1’é Limitatiotl Act. we
will last’-age ta sec.’vqlieihgi;..9cc*{i()I1 15 of the Taxation Act

1’/xv. R1_1lc:*f8 o:'”1.l’1xt: ‘E_”L1xa1.i”(m Rules aroviclin 5 for 21 st.at.utow

z1})}3e:§:1:l’vE’,(; tlmVIVA-ppv¢ll;1,li.e A1,1ll’1(_>1’il:y s2.1t.isI’ies the a.f0resa1’d

t;v{r1’l–“l_§:0.1j1(i.i1’iqi’1s_ for a1tt.1*21(ttiI1g the 21pplicabi11’t.y of Section

29{‘.’.2′}v'(I)l’Vl’fl’l.§f*-LAiE;Ilil,aI’i(.)1′} AC1. ‘l”l’1erc (‘,EEI’i1’lO’t. be any dispute

Ivthat “i*i.a1;i’r121lal<z1 ,M01:<)1" Velqicles 'l"'axal.1'()1l1 Act, 1957 is a

V~:lS;)e;(ii_21l or a local law. Rule 31 of the Taxation Rules

' p19«:255z’ibes 1.110 period of 1in1ilat_.i(m for ihe £1ppE’.8..l under

My

Seciiion 15 of 1.110 ‘1’;-1.xaiio1i1 ACE. \\”1Ii(.’lI is Cllfl'(,’l’Cl”1l’ from ‘{.he

period presc~.i*ibe.d by {he Scl1ecl1.11e as tlie S(:l1ec’i1V.aVlé,_iio the

E.imii.a.t_io1’1 Act does noi o(_)iii:e1iipla.1;<;=. a1113.j"""pL§i<i.o(,7€;_. of

limi'i.at.ion for filing appeal bei'oi'e the A})_pc.=:ilaic A.ot..li(;ijft.y.. p

under Sect;i()n 15 of the 'I'axat.io:i 'Act.,_-~ r_)i;' iii_o1.h'tr 'W:o.ifd<~3. it

pi*esc_::'ib<:s "1'1il" pa-?ri(:)cl. ()l'lll1'i.l'{'tZ.l_:l()l'l i"o.i"::i_:1Clii':ai:.i:appc?3al.d

is by now well sct.z'.ls(_l t:l1e1_t.p__i:i:iA-pa –sii.1.iatji–o1i:Hviflierein the
period of limitation is or local law
for an appeal poi' app} thert-2 is no
provision Act, the second

oo:1dit;ioiimli'(J11atti'ai;.:'i:ii'ig_Seoiiioi1"'29(2) would get' satisfied.

W'hei'i l:l°;.€'..'l«'i1'$l ..oil~1.li1c=;*. Lll11llE'1l,l()l'1 Act: prescribes

no timg-3 liiiik fr_):*_a- p';;1i'f.i'o1.:lai* appeal. but the special law

."'1.)1't3Ls<'*i*il.:1'{:.s a..i.i1'ne lvilfiii. for it. it can be said thelt. 1.1:'"1dc::' the

Ks-.'.'ii's;:_ S::lf1~e_cl"u.V1'e_vof the Limitai'ioi'1 AC1, all appeals can be

fiiod..__ai: a~i'iyff:.~ii11e, but the special law by limiting it provides

V.'i"()Al",E1. cii'i7l}:%;'e'r1i: period. While the io'i'mer permits the filing

. l7I_V”‘z1:«1’l appeal at any Eime, the 1ati:ei’ limits it to be filed

‘ ” -»wii.l’1i1.’1 the pi’es(:1″ibsc.l period. It i:lioi”ol’ore., (l.ifferent

W

from that pi'(3SCI’ibGCl in the former. 2m(l tIhL.1s, Sectfiori 29(2)

oi’ rlie Limit’:-1i’i(‘)11 Act woulcl apply eve:’1 to a (:ase.._w-E16-,.1j_c 21

(lil’l’e:’e1’1(:c-2 b€{‘.\\7(:’,£’.i’1 the special law and I.i.z’=}jil’.é1t>i’Qi:1__:’

arose by the omission to pr0v_i(i€_ for-‘lifI’1’iial:ibn’;t,o.i_ 3″

})Eil”E’,i(‘.L1l.’:11′ pr()ceecllz’1g u11(.le1′ t.’I1e l;lITi:§’fEtT”lOIl.ACf.”LESVV lie}€:lI1;_1’11

the case of vIDYAcHARAN__V”:’::HUKm: +psi;’,_V”i:m..IBcimN:):l’

BAGHEL [AIR 1964 sc;_1o99

ll. Once the c011di1;io1’1s are
sailsfiecl. Secxtigifl’ Act. on its own
f()l'(_’.C will the Appellate

Autl1oi3i__ty 1,1ncle’i*.vS.§3a(:w1iQn””1..5_ olklie ‘l’a1xat:i0n Act. In Vi€W of

;’113pli(.%a1l)ili’i,y oi’ lE’:c;:’c’¥t:Ai(;.ii.°249V(2] of the. Limitation Act: to

z;11);)(-fiiils >1.u’1clc9fi* i..Sc*(.:t:io1’1 l5 of the “i’a><atIi011 Act: for

(*Qmpuli,ir1«g period of limitatiori prescribed for appeals

11.’;-1Ac..l”-*_->.1′ lllléil’:j.”SC?'(iTlii(.)l”i, all the provisions (.>fSe(:t.i()1’is 4 to 24 of

] ithe l’..l.{.]l”11::&1″[:lOi”l Act: would apply. Section 5 being one of

f'{:li.ér11._xvo11ld therefom get: attracted. Them: is no express

c$s;ctlL.isi(_)z’1 2;1i1ywhc-we in the Ka’1*11aE.al<e1 l\/Iofiior Vehicles

EJ
'J1

special law. It 13c(*,0me:'3 i'.11ei'ci'0rc a}_)}_)21i'e1'11': rlizii: on a

C(.)11j0ini. 1'e21ding of S("'(".1"i(.)I} 29(2) of E_,imiiati0n Acri

and SC('.I.i()1] 15 (_)I'1E'1e K211'1'1z.:1z1ka iViot"()1' V('.hi('_.'.:'i't"¢".:;H."fF£1X&i1;i()i71

A01, 1957 r/w. Rule 31 ()f1'}"}.€ KEl§I121'['E1k£1"

'£'axai1ion R1_11es. 121210 131'<.)\risiA((?ii§1diI1g the
applicabiliiy of St:L:t:i()i’1x”–25.>ifi AC1; to appeais
under Sectionv of fixp1’ess mention
in the spectizii exclusion.

14-._ 2″1_’i1’c_éx.piicss_2’iiefizggiiage of Secrtimi 29(2) Clearly

1’I’1ciica_t.es tiht-.:1t “:ex11C1f1 As.+:p€:*e.:iaI or local law musi provide for

«-.pi==r1’i’:<_)'(ii Q–f_Ei1.11iie1tii.j1i——~£7mr filing <)I'ssi,1ii. appeal or appiic21i,io1'i

_ci1i¢i't,21i1i!.,;ib1'€.__L1':}de1* such laws aim) for (:0m.p'Liting pe3'i0d

Of',1ii'}1i{LvE!t.i!()iTi':1.111661" S"-31.1('.h s}3t3Cial or local law. the

W1_4egisi2ii,i._ii)e has made available the 1nz:1c:11j11e1"y of Sections

'4'vE:.Q_:24 as fomid in the Li111ii.e1i.io11 Am. I\E<i)w1ic:z*e ii: is

V. .,Vi_l._?f('1i(',21t.e(:i ithziit. as per SEi'(',fli(I)I} 29(2). (tilt-* C(.)'1.1l'E.-S f111"1(':t.i011i1'ig

V'

u11cIc~.r s11(rE'1 Speciai or Iocfal law must. be g<)ver1'1ed by the

C()c1e of Civi} Pro(?cd1Sn'C.

1.5. Learned Single JL1dge in C_l1_irir’:qvef1Ica£”ésh.7S

case by rclyi.11g;§_ on the j1Lz(ig11’1(=;*.,’11t; ”

SALES TAX, UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOWLA 453-”

TOOLS AND PLANTS, Ina.NPiiR.;.”:~eporiéc1 1975 SC
1039, ims ()bS€I’V(-:’.(f1 are merely
instrL11nem’,alit:i<3S of and powezrs
are govemecl 'i»'hiA(:11 they are created
E-{RC1 I.ha'r into Courts of Civil
J11ci_ic:z1.';LLLétg 1 it held therein that Section
29(2) Sf Act will apply onfy 1.0 the

})I"(,)(.?('fC?C.'1iI")§:{S ()"i'.__IhV(:'. C"-:)ur1.s (..?(')l'1S{Hl.I1'€?d uncic~.r Specie-11 or

'E'o<:¢_1f I2u?Lg w11i<:}1 are Ch/if Co1.u'{;S. SI:'I'icto sen.Su..

We. are not: cr01'1c_:er11c3d witE'1 the applicability of

t',vhNe Ar1:.i.c1eS 0ft':1"1e S<_:h_eciu1e of the L,.imiTati<_)n Act for

— gm-‘(é1*i’1.i11g {.118 p’cri0d of Iin1it,aI:’i0n as }j)l'(“‘,SCl’ibCd by S€Cti()I’1

” of the ‘1″axe1’ii()1’1 Act r/w. Rule. (3 1. of the TE1Xé1{,i.()l’1 Rules.

10/)

_. 33 ..

AM. eould be im.pc)1-ted imo Section 10[3}[B} ()’i”E’.11at.’. Act’ by

analogy. Seetio11 10(3)(B) of the UP. Sales’ Act

provides for filing revisi011s u1’1cier the ;_.vp”e1′

sub~se(;:1.i0n 3(8) of Section 10, such 21pp}iL22ii.~iVof1S ‘re’

be 1112-xcie within one year from ‘(lie date::ef’ese1fVi’c:e’

but the revisi1’1g a.L.1t’.1’1e1*it.y’ :1’=éé1y.. on p1’e(.i1″Qfsé{1fi7i.L:i.é:3.I1I1.€?a1use,’

e1’1{–,ert,ain an applicaeiorl of Six
r1101’1ths. In View of in the speeiai
Act. it was l’1ei’d__ by:”f£”1’e the general
pr0visi_011s pf Act could not
3111.1 t.l1at per Section
14(2) the appliez-mt. was persuing

any ci\_ri1 printeVed.iV1’t:gs’*.\rvi’t:.I1 cine c1i1ige11(1e in the first Court:

M451′ 2::.1{yi.i’1i;_2;i’1e.1* CI(‘)1f1’i*’t”‘ézxgaizlsl. the s2.11′”r3e party for the same

e._1′(3é1.ie.f} upex1fi()d spent shall be excluded if such

pm~ee.ec1i11g§S4j’..–vve1’c? f()1.m(.E to have been filed in §§()()d faith in

‘ “L1AC:O”L,I};1@F;Vhi()l’1. from defect. ofjurisdie.tior1 or other cause of

‘e-1″1–ike:’ i1&1tLLI”C, was unable to €1’1{‘,(-311131311 it. It is to

u …\,.r;’e1.:2.1lj:”_ec=-: fzllat iI”Se(*.1.i(‘)1″: 14(2) applied to applie2:1’::i(>I1s for

_ ._
1*e%visio11s u1’1(ic1* SC(‘.’I’i(H1 10{3}[I:3} of t.1’1<=;' UP. Sales; Tax Act,

then ve1’1 iE”suc}o1 fmit’.1}; Apt”. f’\2I(o)’1″t:t)V\reo~1f:,'”fiI.j’eJte_Vwasé

6’Xpl’C’,Sb’ p1’ovisio11 in ()1; 10 of the
UP. Sales Tax Act p{.1ij’t;id,§g the powers of the
l’€3V”iSi(‘)}}ElI 21L;t’.I’1o:1*’i’5′._Y cifi-gI?’c’i’1d~ :{)¥1’1v_j”pf’§)oi:.Vé;{::}§t’:1f;fi(*i(:nt” cause to
ent:ert’a1in s§r..:~(‘§1=:¢’__ :s1’11§i1’vwas only up to 21
f111*t’1’1eIj’ I5e1fo§i beyond one year as
p1’crs(t1*if3g2c1′; 4′ __’t’i”11’s cxpmass provision to the

(,’,()l1′[.l”c].1’y 21:’-:__fcm nEi .i.f;i’A’SE?V(:i”[€.§v()’I] lO[3}[B) of the UP. Sales Tax

Act’: .m2ad<o: at'}1o"'g('r1'1t'1"z-11 p1'oVis;'.ons of Section 14(2)

"'«.¢i;'1a»1.;:§o;3'iioabie as i'1"""'ox:vVa-1s an cxprc~s;s provisimns to the

Coj*xt».xra1'y "to«.,% \%;r1"1_a.t. is provided in Section 14(2). It is

§j1t_<=:'c%'i_._.s;31y7i'1’1 held that the object, the scheme and

u “«.V1’a11g1.1a$§€– of S€(..’UC)l’1 E0 of the UP. Sales Tax Act do moi:

‘N,/5

30–

pern11’_t’ the i1’e1\:'<'r21ti<.)1'1 of Sectic__n1 14(2) of The L,imit.a1.ion

Act. eit.111′, in f’EI1’1″I1Ei._ or in p1’incip}e. for ex(:1L1cii.1’1gV'{;hei;i1T1e

spem in prc)se.v1.1ting pr(‘>c’:eedi;’1gs for se1′:t.i1:;’g”‘egsi-die”:_the

dismisssa} of appeals in default. for (?Or}T})Lltj’c:Ii”i.O’BV of 2

period of 1i1nit.a1i(e)1’1 ;.)resc:ribe(i f'(‘2.;’ i’§._1’i:*:§; at..1’evvisid1ife._u1′::sfler

the Sales ‘1’a1x Act. [see GdPAi..AN

PUTHANPURAYIL ABQoBAcK;?:Re._t*»».»A1R” ~19 95 VVESUPREME

COURT 22 72).

In the :11aQt.t.ve_1′ cf Mui«.::’i.4′ Gfvopaivar; “‘(supra). the Apex

Court urhi};e”(finé’i’d?e_riI1g..__t:I«;:: ‘;é:_im_’i1a1_:’ cmesteion. referred to

the (‘:2-i’se> ‘()..FVCi}E11”?iiS.’§’i()}:’¢-fzi’Qf Sales Tax, Utiar Pradesh,
Lu.ekr1ou..= =~sLL~.:~ P:?crsbr 1 .T&3oZS and Plants (cited supra). and

(j)E3Sf?§;’V’¥fi§(‘E. 1.11115″ :– V

any case. the scope OfSeett’on 29(2)
‘z(..,=.v.fi:;é-:.._f1eV’I.;~.e©r’zsiderecl by the qforesaid decision
VA Ql”V.i$ie’E–.V.tF’i;ree? learned Judges and (?or1.seqLLer’ztlu
‘ gléeéarirzoie be held 10 be an authority for the

prkjposiiiorez that in revisional proceedings

‘before the Sales Tax’ az.zi}’1oriI.z’es flimczioninq

Hilde?!’ the UP. Sales Tax Act. Section 29(2)
cannot applx; as Azfr-.Nczrir’1Lcu2 wozzlci like
hay-eil’.”‘ ” .’

(Emphasis supplied}

In the said jL:cig111e111′. of Mulqi’ Gcigfifidictfi,» V1′:’}’1e

Court was considering the qL1<e$'t;i()i:;_i_AT'ais ate

AppE:'.HEiE"Ei Aut11'1()1"i1'y c:c)11stit'iJ;V_éL=%..V_mlcfclj S~i’: “‘I”8V ‘bf the’

Kerala Rem. Act. 196.5,. fi.111c;t;i–r1S.3321 com¢.%’a1m as to
whether the period of 1i£’JT1.i’f£1.T.iQ.§1jpfE§&’3£fiTj}f)Cd therein under
Sec:ti011 “I8 gc)y@~1¢r_;iz3g £11632,21_§;}})e.;i1S” by’agg’1’ic\red. parties will

be c:o_mput.céd i::_”e.e’}’>’1h_hg i’1v.1:{.A.s,,tJié*’2;i p.1’Ovisi()ns of Sections 4

to 24 (Sf me I,iV111i:’E.z1:11io:41uM’AEit..’ The Apex Court considering

Various ~i11ki«g1i1e111s_ ai::1fiiV.b}r 1’elyi1T1g upon the’: jL1dgmen11S in

gr COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX. U.P. ~03-

& sozvs BAREILLY ( AIR 1977 SC 523),

a’nd”:n 1-hc§’1″}jo?ei§s§: of SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD-. –

vs- n&:aIi;«;_BiR SUGAR MILLS (P) LTD., (AIR 1982 so 119),

” E.:2;1$L’fuléici that the Appeilaie A11t.E’101’i1y L.1r1 and tile pcri0(l of li1nil.z:1t.ltm pl-Cs(.:1’iE’.)ecl 1.l1e1*ein

Lmdcr Se(:1:io1’1 £8 governing appeals by a.gg1*iev<3cifp'e1rties

will be cc.)mp'1.11'ccl kee.pin;.§ in VlC'\V the }l):1"o'»riAL';"si(,)_ll'31Lé»_._A' of

Sections 4 to 24 of i'l'1<3 I.in1it.at.i()11 Ac1..st_,1{:l3…

procecclirlgs will att.1*act S€Cl1iO1'1 .'in.,.i.'I1'1i4ta1':.'i-r)_r1w«.Act

a11(l crcmsec1L1ently. Se(~.li0n -Q1" 1116,l.,imite1iit'):j;Act _w0L1l_dK

also be applicable to such l'Ll}rthe1* held
ther<31'n that the will have the
_lLEl'iS€1.iL".l'i()I1 to cc2.n si(le:r'"t'l%.éfAc}l1sgéatglflli; whether delay
in filing on sufficient
cause 'l.l'1'<::"_'tit')'r1;(:e1'11ed applicant for the
<;l<3lay i1:i'.&£"i'll.l'1g§ h The jndgmA.t1l”:e 1:i”l2t’ij’r.é1* on hzzmd.

._In.,_’the._l”m;:1t’l;e1* of Union of India. us. Popular

: (2001 )8 SCC 470. the appl.ic:al’ion of

‘.VA.rl:)i1″,:’21t.i’cn VEiI’lCl C()ncili2;1t:i<)n Ac:1:._ 1996 was in q_uesl:i0r1.

é X'_i»'l'1c§ l}k.1"l3il:1-a1j.i()11 Act clearly provicled for a limitation. in the

'N7'

ma1'1.cr of exer(:is0 of (Pisc.:1'ctic_mary _}urisc1i(:ti(m for

c*c_)1'1_dc)ning the delay oniv for 21 period of 30 days tihifii not

t'hc1'ca1't'c1'. Ii xv;-15 in that simzuzion. the SL1;3'1"c11';e__ 'Co_i1r1_

held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act

no app1i(~.a1'i<m. as 21 sspecial
for.

17′. In the case of CC)T7’1’Iv’}T’f:’?gs’§iOfV1€7’V”Qf U.P. —
u.L1rt was
c0nc:crneci with the qoe-sf:i_o1.1 Section 12(2)
of the 1;.r,v% ‘1oV(V::’éijoplicable to revision

pet:itoi0i’.1s f1’1r;%dV’i:i’n–:1e{*’::Se.cfic)_r;– 1.0 of the same UP. Sales “Fax

Act. A})ۤ<: holci that for the purpose of

detor_§:'1'1"ining 'any penod of hr11it:a::ion prescncibeci for any

e1fJ'p1ic;:a_tion«.453: any special or local law', the provisions

<:cni':.«21inVéd"_'i»r1 S.éo'Lic)1a 12 {.2}, inter alia. shall apply in so far

'V as. é{12'1(i"'_t.(5"tho eX{:e11t. to which they are not expressly

..fc§<c§EL,t.ded by such special or local law. and i'he:'e is nothing

iii {he UP. Sales Tax Act. expressly eX(:hz(.ii11g,'2; the

W

appli(éaii(m of SeC1i0r"1 1.2 (2) of the Limitation Act.

C()}'"1S('(11..1.C.HU}/. t:i'"1c .E3'c1id prc.)vis:eion \VEfES heici a;)pli(§;1'f3iicr to

the filing of1'evisi01'1 a1ppIi(t21i,io1'1s "under S€(?T.i(;')Y1'<1VO.__bf;_fl"ifi

UP. Sait-as Tax Act. I1. becomes tiicrefore _ebV_i"(3.us–.fi}1.at tvihcz,

aifbmsziici Ci('3('iSiC)i'1 ('riea.1'iy ei1)1)IiC1{i S.9g:f1'iO–:'} ' 9-[2']V'=i_Q

revision petiti<)n.s fiiecl b€f0l7E§ revisidn V:-u.1t',I'1:)i"it]ies_ milder ziui»

spe(':iai law like U.P. Sales (1'Ei%VV"A(7i';, §1I}d.hKfiiéii.S€£iUOI'] 29(2)

applied Section 12V{'.2–}.V:i"()_iA' "–_t,i13;f.'1.I;i'rifi-iiétiion AC1 to such

revisional pr0ce(-;{ii1'1gs,.A"'This Vcls.:'c:ii_si

(..'(.)1}(.T(‘1’I’1(,’d with the questioii as to \’\-‘l’1t”il’.}’1E.’i’ the DiViSi0l’1E1l
C ommission er actin u 1′} cler th e U . P.Su gamazie
{R(¥l£gl.}l&ill()l”} of Supply and Pl..ll'(‘.l1£lS(‘3] Act. 1953 21(:1_;ec;l,p as a

Revenue Court 01′ whether lie \.\-“as .21 persona d~€3sig.rfit_a1″(,1,V”

was held that the Divisional COfl1H1iSS_i.Q.I1_a€”f. had.’_ been

r

c0nstitut.ed an Appellate. Atllilll-§)1’ityHt11i1C:l’§21′.: P:(;t_,_ [hat

showed that the Divisional,’ Con1r1ii_ss’i0ne::»Waa

Appellate Revenue Court but hot’ as a _perso’:1a’e;1es:gna:a.
‘l’hat: being so, it ()l:SViQu.$”~-.that~lSectiori 5 of the

Limitation Act.,applievd-VitoV-appealsl”‘*.1l3ei’0re Divisional

Cc)1111nisSli(‘m.ef:,aiitlj”l’1e’–.;€0uldxhtaridoiie the delay in filing
elppeatlsfp ‘

_F_1*()i1’1°1:l1e’ alpx-‘.we*._ it” clear that the Apex Court was

., ,,.c:.lc-22:1:-Eviirigi1}-w’i~ih Rc_€\’-‘”c’i1’itje Court (.'(j)l’1SlIiE’,l.}l€C.l uiidtil’ UP.

of Supply and Purchase] Act, which

we1:ss.._:g1. speC_4if¢:«.;lAie1w. It was in terms held that S(‘,Cl’.i()1’1 5 of

l “the. Lin.1it:;}1t.i(>h Act was; applicable to 2’evisi0nal pr()(:eedings

_ ‘l3e’i”e_rfe such Revenue Courts. 01’ course. in the said

W

.. WV) .

dc=’><':isi()11. no c)t.l1er dec:isi.on of {.119 Apex Court was cited

2;m.('E S('(*.t.i(')11 29(2) wzls 1."1ot' c.xp:'c?s:~'1_\~' 1'c%{1'1'1'c-:(.'l t.().M'i.;).1..'1'i 11T1c-?

11211.10 01 M10 dcCisi<')1'1 is 1'1C(?('S€~3EE11'i]_\«' a1'1<.1 i111pIi(.:_i_€j'I'y"'bg:€s.§:c.i:_.01?

the 21ppIical:)i1i1;y of SeCt.i0n 29[2} E'31.;Hth for \V}'1'i'L'.§I"}.':§:'.f:Cii()'£'1

t.1'1(==: Lin1.ita1Tiora Act' would not }1z1\-'C'~..I)cc'§:n .1-51121'Cl_e AappI'i<i;1b1'c: {:(.)

nwision pr<)ccc=.di11,gs l.)£:f()1'(: _ =7Z¢\«'c-':11L'u-. -C?ou*3?_1.' ffz.v11i1(;tib11i11;gV*

1..111der1Thc*. Special law. _ _

19. It is to be i{:_:p’t.._ ir1.’mi}.1d -«tj_i’a,:.i’é;-.S€ct.ic)r1 29(2)

a1.t’:E’.1’ac1c(i for (:.:()n’11)L.1E.i1′:g};_i’.1.:.;: ‘}i)’L’;;fi()rfl’~.vL)V’1¢’~V~..IVi.I’1′}iTé1T.i(.)1’i for any

suit, e+_;jV’i1.;{-§é.}’i{A 2113′;j’ii<r;1=:.jE)1'1 u§'"ij(i= fiicd before :11.111'10riti<2s
under 5P@(Ti~E11 01? .1€A)..\'\~'.?/:_1 I"';'._'_c1 A'\'='»'.4if the cronclitums {aid dowr1 in

the 5-,1_Vi}?i.<~=.i.r..)..':a "V;-"5111? e.s21%.isfi<i%(1. 2:u1('1 UIICEB they ggcél

°:-e:.;t'i':s–1'i.i:(f%';2 mg': 131'()V?'i'§s"ii.)1'1s c:<'J1.'1t21i1"1e(.1 in S()Ct.i(.)1'1..~s 4 to 24

:::;1V1 e1lI :,:..;.j'1–,\_ly' VtQ _}s11(;th 1i)1'(')(Tt%t3di1'}gS. mea:'1i11g, t.hc-'.1't-.'by the

})1'()er.j'111(‘ (.*.o1:1c1’1’1p1e’1.tv;’:(.l by H”1c:.sc St-:'(‘.’.tIi£)1″}S of the:

“i…§miEat:m1’a Act wmilcl get. 1.c’é1c=.s(‘:L>pt:d into such pmvisions of

” . :s;.5’e=:::§.211 or 1902-11 E2-1w.

W

Lu

-J

20. En \’i(‘.’\-‘\«-‘ of tin: e.1t3c_)v<:. xve <:c')11clz,.1(.1e tllat the

period of li111itation prescribecl under Section 1v57.,_of;t:he

'1'axation Act 1'/w. R1116 31 of tlie Taxat.'1on

ctomp1.1t:ed }<eepi1'1g in viesw the p1*(o)yf»tsio1"1s_of~S§3:tti'o11sA 4}__tog V

24 of the l,irnitat,ion Act, 1963:-._ S:;1'c:1'.t' "t=;r;_f11

attract Section 29(2) ol' _ tLitoit_z1tiot1:{.'AC1.

(?()nscquent.iy Section of also be
applicable to such Qfippellatct Authority
Lmder S(‘;’C§”.i()I1u the jurisdiction
to consider; the delay in ffling
suck} tl\;}’§)~«,5»’§lv’;);1 s:,1ffiCi€r1t cause being
made ()v1u:.1~t’ utfiy ..:1poii(t2111t_ for the delay in filing

s1.1crh_21oppeal”S. V .

A ‘1’13’ifm é~.}Z.1′(-2 Ia-:t_wm’1’;’a.1c:1 in the (‘raise of CHINNAVENKATESH

*Rv.*1f.-_ –AL»s.§”:s1;«§NtI.oR RTO, MYSORE av, ANOTHER ( 1975 (2) KLJ

385″}. is ,._:’1(;».1r3:(>1’e a good law on the point and Consczqtlently

_’i.i;1c_juctgn.1_<:nt; in Chi:zrtcwenktziesh is ove1=x'1,11<:<i.

W

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information