IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ST.Rev..No. 58 of 2007()
1. STATE OF KERALA.
... Petitioner
Vs
1. M/S. HOTEL GEO,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
For Respondent :SRI.V.P.SUKUMAR
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
Dated :19/11/2008
O R D E R
H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J.
------------------------------------------------------
S.T.Rev.No. 58 of 2007 &
C.M.Appln.No.163 of 2007
---------------------------------------------
Dated, this the 19th day of November, 2008
O R D E R
H.L.Dattu, C.J.
State, being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Kerala Sales
Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench-II, Ernakulam in
T.A.No.624/2004 dated 21.6.2005 , is before us in this revision petition.
(2) In filing the revision petition there is a delay of 442 days.
To condone the said delay, C.M.Appln.No.163/2007 is filed. Along with the
said application an affidavit is filed before us. In the said affidavit it is stated
that, the order of the Tribunal was received in the office of the Joint
Commissioner (Law) on 24.8.2005 and, that, after obtaining the proposal
from the Commissionerate, Thiruvananthapuram the files were sent to the
office of the Advocate General on 12.12.2005 for preparing the revision
petition and ascertaining the opinion from the concerned Government Pleader.
It is stated that, the files were placed before the concerned Government
Pleader on 8.1.2007. It is also stated that after preparation of the revision the
same was signed on 20.1.2007 and entrusted to the office of the Advocate
General for filing on the same day itself.
(3). It is further stated in the affidavit that, delay was caused on
S.T.Rev.No.58/2007 -2-
account of administrative reasons as well as by reason of heavy work
load in the office of the Advocate General and concerned Government
Pleader. It is also stated that some delay was caused in getting the
assessment records from the concerned assessing authority. It is also
stated that the delay is not wilful.
(4) The explanation offered by the petitioner for
condonation of the delay in filing the Sales Tax Revision case is wholly
unsatisfactory. Therefore, the delay in filing the revision petition cannot
be condoned by us. Accordingly the application for condonation of
delay requires to be rejected and it is rejected.
(5) Consequently the revision petition is also rejected.
(6) The question of law raised in this revision petition is
left open to be agitated in an appropriate case.
Ordered accordingly.
(H.L.DATTU)
CHIEF JUSTICE
(A.K.BASHEER)
JUDGE
MS