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 THURSDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2008 / 16TH SRAVANA 1930 S.T.Rev.No.257 of 2005 --------------------------------------- T.A.NO.517/2003 OF THE KERALA AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX & SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, PALAKKAD (ORDER DATED 30TH JUNE, 2003) .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/REVENUE:- --------------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER (TAXES) SRI.VINOD CHANDRAN. RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/ASSESSEE:- -------------------------------------------------------------- M/S.DEEPA PANELS, MANUFACTURERS OF CHEMICALLY TREATED RUBBER WOOD PRODUCTS, VILAYOOR, PATTAMBI. BY ADV. SRI.N.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR & SRI.V.K.SHAMUSUDHEEN. THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ORDERS ON 07/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:- H.L.Dattu,C.J. & A.K.Basheer,J. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- S.T.Rev.No.257 of 2005 & C.M.Appln.No.474 of 2005 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 7th day of August, 2008 ORDER H.L.Dattu,C.J. State, being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Kerala Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Palakkad in T.A.No.517 of 2003 dated 30th June, 2003, is before us in this revision petition. (2) In filing the revision petition there is a delay of 379 days. To condone the said delay, C.M.Appln.No.474 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. (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 vku/-