IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT :- THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2008 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 ST.Rev..No.162 of 2008 --------------------------------- (ORDER OF THE KERALA SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH-II, ERNAKULAM DATED 19.10.2006 IN T.A.No.494 OF 2006) (ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-2000) --------------- REVISION PETITIONER/ RESPONDENT/REVENUE:- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER(LAW), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MUHAMMED RAFIQ. RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE:- -------------------------------------------------------- M/S.ORMA GRANITE PALACE, KOTHAKULANGARA, ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.ISSAC M.PERUMPILLIL. SRI.JIJO PAUL KALLOOKKARAN. THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ORDERS ON 10/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ------------------------------------------------------ S.T.Rev.No. 162 of 2008 & C.M.Appln.No.401 of 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 10th day of December, 2008 O R D E R H.L.Dattu, C.J. This revision petition is filed against the orders passed by the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench-II, Ernakulam in T.A.No.494/2006 dated 19.10.2006. 2. In filing the revision, there is a delay of 430 days. Therefore, an application is filed to condone the delay in filing the revision petition. Along with the said application, an affidavit is filed before us. In the said affidavit it is stated that, the certified copy of the order of the Tribunal passed on 19.10.2006 was received on 29.12.2006, and, that, after perusing the impugned order, the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Special Circle, Commercial Taxes, Mattancherry at Aluva, the concerned authority forwarded his remarks with a proposal to file revision against the order, to the office of the Deputy Commissioner (General), Office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Thiruvananthapuram on 4.6.2007. The Deputy Commissioner after considering the said proposal forwarded his proposal dated 4.7.2007 to file the revision to the Joint Commissioner (Law), S.T.Rev.No. 162/2008 -2- Ernakulam. It is stated that, the said proposal was received at the office of the Joint Commissioner (Law), Ernakulam on 16.7.2007. Thereupon the Joint Commissioner (Law) called for the back records from the assessing authority and the same was received at his office on 22.8.2007. It is further stated in the affidavit that, immediately thereafter he made a proposal to file revision before the office of the Advocate General vide letter dated 25.8.2007. The files were placed before the concerned Government Pleader to examine the scope for filing the revision on 7.9.2007. It is stated that, after verification of the records the Government Pleader opined for filing revision and thus the revision was prepared and filed before this Court. 3. It is further stated that, after the receipt of the impugned order, though the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Special Circle, Commercial Taxes, Mattancherry at Aluva, the assessing authority had taken all earnest efforts, he could verify the voluminous records and submit the proposal on 4.6.2007 due to heavy work load at his office. It is stated that the Deputy Commissioner (General) Office of the Commissioner of Taxes, Trivandrum is the officer designated to verify such proposals received from the assessing authorities throughout the State and to instruct the Joint Commissioner S.T.Rev.No. 162/2008 -3- (Law), Commercial Taxes, Ernakulam for filing revision. The said officer is expected to recommend proposals for filing revisions received from the assessing authorities only in appropriate cases. It is stated that, in the present case, the said officer was diligent enough to forward his recommendations within 16 days. Upon receiving the proposal from the Deputy Commissioner, the Joint Commissioner (Law) in charge, Ernakulam immediately called for the records from the assessing authority and after obtaining the same placed the matter before the Office of the Advocate General within 10 days. The post of the Special Government Pleader (Taxes) in the office of Advocate General was vacant during that time. The Government Pleader before whom the files were placed for examining the scope of appeal/revision on 7.9.2007 was overburdened with works previously allotted to the Special Government Pleader also. It is stated that, since he was on court duty throughout, he could prepare the revision and send it for signature only by 24.5.2008. It is stated that the delay is not wilful or deliberate. 4. The explanation offered by the petitioner for condonation of delay in filing the Sales Tax Revision case is wholly unsatisfactory. We do not mean that Revenue has to explain each day's delay. But, they are supposed to satisfactorily explain the delay that has S.T.Rev.No. 162/2008 -4- occurred between 29.12.2006 and 25.8.2007 and between 7.9.2007 and 3.6.2008.. 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 questions of law raised in the revision petition is left open to be agitated in an appropriate case. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE MS