Disposed

Minescape Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Thr. Its Aut. Sign., Ashok Cotta v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxex, Panaji and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC8 Jul 2021MCA/129/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this miscellaneous civil application, the High Court of Bombay at Goa condoned a delay of 53 days in filing a tax revision under the Goa Value Added Tax Act 2005, accepting the explanation regarding the pandemic and approved directives as sufficient cause.

What did the court decide?

The delay of 53 days in filing the tax revision application is condoned.

Minescape Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Thr. Its Aut. Sign., Ashok Cotta Vs Commissioner of Commercial Taxex, Panaji and 2 Ors. — Bombay HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

(19) MCA 129 2021 in (F) STM 1607 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶4

 MCA/129/2021

¶5

IN

¶6

 STM/1607/2020 (Filing No)

¶7

MINESCAPE MINERALS
PVT. LTD., THR. ITS AUT.
SIGN., ASHOK COTTA ….... APPLICANT
VS

¶8

COMMISSIONER OF
COMMERCIAL TAXEX,

¶9

PANAJI AND 2 ORS ….... RESPONDENTS

¶10

Mr. Aniket Kunde with Mr. Nikhil A. Vaze, Advocates for the Applicant.

¶11

Mr. D. J. Pangam, Advocate General with Ms. A. Kamat, Additional
Government Advocate for the Respondents.

¶12

 CORAM: M. S. SONAK &

¶13

 SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR, JJ.
 DATE : 8th July, 2021.
P. C. :

¶14

The learned counsel for the parties state that they have no objection to
this Bench taking up this petition.

¶15

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

3. This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 53 days in filing the tax revision application under the provisions of the Goa Value Added Tax Act 2005.

¶17

4.Mr. Kunde, the learned counsel for the applicant refers to the cause
shown in the civil application. He submits that the Covid-19 pandemic also
contributed to the delay. He refers to the directives on the aspect of extension of

¶18

¶19

(19) MCA 129 2021 in (F) STM 1607 2020

¶20

limitation in Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No.3/2020.

¶21

5. According to us, sufficient cause has been shown and, accordingly, the delay of 53 days in filing the revision application is hereby condoned.

¶22

6. Miscellaneous Civil Application no.129 of 2021 is disposed of.

¶23

 SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR , J. M. S. SONAK, J.

¶24

Ap/-

¶25

MARIA Digitally signed by MARIA AURA AURA PEREIRA Date: 2021.07.09 PEREIRA 14:28:14 +05'30'

Minescape Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Thr. Its Aut. Sign., Ashok Cotta v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxex, Panaji and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Minescape Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Thr. Its Aut. Sign., Ashok Cotta v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxex, Panaji and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vitorino Salvador Colasso Vs State of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary and 4 Ors.

Pradip R. Naik., Vs the State of Goa, Rep. Thr. Chief Secretary and 4 Ors.

Shiva Petro-Synth Specialities Ltd., Rep. Thr. Their Duly Const. Att., Sajan Pillai and Anr., Vs Goa State Pollution Control Board, Thr Its Secretary and 3 Ors.

Communidade of Sangolda, Rep. Thr. Their Attorney Vs the State of Goa, Thr. Their Chief Secretary and 10 Ors.

Naveen @ Pandurang K. Prabhu Vs Sanjay B. Naik and 3 Ors.

Living Heritage Foundation, Thr. the Director, Mohan Kumar Vs State of Goa, Thr. Its Principle Secretary (Forests) and 2 Ors.