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 TUESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2008 / 21ST SRAVANA 1930 S.T.Rev..No. 233 of 2005 ---------------------------------------- ORDER DATED 10.10.2002 IN TA.7/2002 OF THE KERALA SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, KOZHIKODE. .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/REVENUE: ------------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (LAW), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.VINOD CHANDRAN RESPONDENT/RSPONDENT/ASSESSEE: ---------------------------------------------------------- M/S.WOOD RESINS AND ALLIED PRODUCTS, BALIAPATTAM. THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ORDERS ON 12/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.Dattu,C.J. & A.K.Basheer,J. -------------------------------------------------------------------- S.T.Rev.No.233 of 2005 & C.M.Appln.No.431 of 2005 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 12th day of August, 2008 ORDER H.L.Dattu,C.J. State, being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Kerala Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Kozhikode in T.A.No.7 of 2002 dated 10th October, 2002, is before us in this revision petition. (2) In filing the revision petition there is a delay of 646 days. To condone the said delay, C.M.Appln.No.431 of 2005 is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Along with the said application a printed affidavit is filed before us. In the said affidavit except stating that the papers were moving from table to table and person to person, no other explanation is offered by the Revenue for the delay in filing the revision petition. It is apropos to mention here, that, no explanation whatsoever has been offered in the stereo-typed affidavit supporting the delay condonation application for the delay between 16.8.2003 and 16.5.2005. (3) 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. (4) Consequently the revision petition is also rejected. Ordered accordingly. H.L.Dattu Chief Justice A.K.Basheer Judge vns/-