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 FRIDAY, THE 29TH AUGUST 2008 / 7TH BHADRA 1930 ST.Rev..No. 273 of 2004 ----------------------------------------- (ORDER DATED 15.10.2001 IN TA.741/1997 OF KERALA SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH, ERNAKULAM ASSESSMENT YEAR 1992-1993) .................... REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/REVENUE: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAW), COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MUHAMMED RAFIQ. RESPONDENT/ APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: --------------------------------------------------------- SRI.VARGHESE ITTOOP, IMPERIAL DISTRIBUTORS, P.T.USHA ROAD, ERNAKULAM. THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ------------------------------------------------------ S.T.Rev.No.273 of 2004 & C.M.Appln. No.734 of 2004 --------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 29th day of August, 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, Ernakulam dated 15th October, 2001 in T.A.No.741 of 1997 is before us in this revision petition. (2) In filing the revision petition there is a delay of 529 days. To condone the said delay, C.M.Appln.No.734 of 2004 is filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act. In spite of granting sufficient time to take out notice to the respondent in the delay petition, the applicant/petitioner has not taken effective steps. That only shows that the applicant/petitioner is not interested in the matter. (3) Along with the application for condonation of delay, an 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. S.T.Rev.No. 273/2004 -2- (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. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE MS