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 16TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 25TH BHADRA 1930 ST.Rev..No. 252 of 2008 ------------------------------------- (ORDER DATED 30.9.2006 OF THE KERALA SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH-I, ERNAKULAM IN TA.No.285/2006) .................... REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/REVENUE: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY JOINT COMMISSIONER (LAW) IN-CHARGE, COMMERCIAL TAXES, ERNAKULAM. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MUHAMMED RAFIQ. RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: -------------------------------------------------------- M/S.BINJOY ENGG. CONTRACTORS, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI-20. THIS SALES TAX REVISION HAVING COME UP FOR ORDERS ON 16/09/2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ------------------------------------------------------ S.T.Rev.No.252 of 2008 & C.M.Appln.No.825 of 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 16th day of September, 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-I, Ernakulam in T.A.No.285/2006 dated 30.9.2006.. 2. In filing the revision, there is a delay of 312 days. Therefore, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is filed to condone the delay in filing the revision petition. 3. Along with the application for condoning the delay, the applicant has filed an affidavit. In the said affidavit it is stated that, the order of the Tribunal dated 30.9.2006 was received in the office of the Joint Commissioner of Law only on 23.7.2007. It is stated that due to heavy administrative works in the office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, in response to the remarks of the Law Officer, the Deputy Commissioner (General), Commercial Taxes, could forward the file for examining the scope for filing revision case to the Advocate General only on 31.7.2007. The office of the Joint Commissioner (Law) S.T.Rev.No. 252/2008 -2- received the file with remarks on 30.8.2007. The case file was submitted to the office of the Advocate General on 24.9.2007. 4. It is stated in the affidavit that on receipt of the case file, the Advocate General placed the same before the Government Pleader (Taxes) for examining the scope for filing revision on 5.10.2007. Though the Government Pleader suggested filing of revision case, he could prepare the memorandum of revision case only on 6.8.2008. It is stated that the delay in the office of the Government Pleader has occurred due to heavy volume of administrative and court works as the Government Pleader was engaged for disposal of old pending original petitions in tax matters. 5. It is further stated in the affidavit that, after the preparation of memorandum of revision case, the file was sent to the section for preparation of paper books and the section prepared the paper books on 28.8.2008 and after obtaining the signature of the Government Pleader on 28.8.2008, the revision was filed on 29.8.2008. It is stated that delay is not wilful or deliberate. 6. The explanation offered by the petitioner for condonation of the delay in filing the Sales Tax Revision case is wholly unsatisfactory. We do not mean that the Revenue has to explain each S.T.Rev.No. 252/2008 -3- day's delay. But, they are supposed to satisfactorily explain the delay that occurred between 23.07.2007 and 24.09.2007, and also between 05.10.2007 and 29.08.2008. 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. 7. Consequently the revision petition is also rejected. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE MS