The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a petition for condoning delay in filing a Tax Case Revision and rejected the connected case, holding that service of notice failed due to the respondent's non-functioning status.
Condonation of delay dismissed; connected case rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
T.C.M.P.(MD)No.975 of 2006
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 31.10.2019 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.THARANI
T.C.M.P.(MD)No.975 of 2006 and T.C.(MD).No.SR13137 of 2006
The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by the Deputy Commissioner (C.T) Tirunelveli Division Tirunelveli-2 ... Petitioner Vs.
Tvl.Shenbagam Traders 5/A-B, Madurai Road, Tirunelveli Junction. ... Respondent
PRAYER (T.C.M.P.(MD)No.975 of 2006) : The Tax Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 38(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, to condone the delay of 90 days in preferring the Tax Case.
PRAYER (T.C.(MD).No.SR13137 of 2006) : The Tax Case Revision is filed under Section 38 of the TNGST Act, to revise the orders of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (AB) Madurai, dated 21.03.2013, passed in M.T.S.A.No.1098 of 2001.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.K.Baskarapandian Special Government Pleader
ORDER
[Order of this Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. ]
This petition has been filed to condone the delay of 90 days in preferring the Tax Case Revision. The petition was filed on 07.04.2005 and notice was ordered to the respondent through Court and privately on 15.03.2018.
2.We find from the office report that the notice sent to the respondent/dealer was returned with an endorsement that the dealer is not functioning in the said address and the private notice was also returned 'Notknown'. Since the Revenue has not taken effective steps to serve the respondent/dealer, that too, in the case filed in the year 2006, no purpose will be served in keeping the matter https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ pending any longer. Accordingly, the tax civil miscellaneous
1/2
T.C.M.P.(MD)No.975 of 2006
petition seeking for condonation of delay is dismissed. The question, which has been framed for consideration, is left open. Consequently, connected T.C.(MD).No.SR13137 of 2006 is rejected.
Assistant Registrar (CO)
Sub Assistant Registrar(CS )
sji/mrn
T.C.M.P.(MD)No.975 of 2006 and T.C.(MD).No.SR13137 of 2006 31.10.2019
MK (22.11.2019) 2P 1C
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to condone a 90-day delay in filing a Tax Case Revision where service Notice could not be effected as the respondent was not functioning at the address.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Tamil Nadu
Tvl.Shenbagam Traders
T.Sivagnanam
R.Tharani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
