Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2008 (1) TMI 745

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ENTED BY : Shri Shekhar Vyas, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri V. Chaudhry, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice S.N. Jha, President]. - These appeals came up for hearing on the point of stay. When the appeals were taken up earlier, it was submitted by the learned Departmental Representative on behalf of the Revenue that no useful purpose will be served by granting stay, as having regard to the nature of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the present appeals are not fit to be entertained. It was stated that the appeals arise from an order by which the appeals preferred by the appellant before the Commissioner (Appeals) were dismissed on the ground of limitation. It was pointed out that in terms of the proviso .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed period of sixty days, he may extend the period up to thirty days more. Any order of the Commissioner dismissing the appeal filed beyond the period of ninety days, therefore, cannot be said to be illegal. 4. It was submitted on behalf of the Revenue that there being no illegality in the order of the Commissioner, inasmuch as he has no option but to dismiss the appeal as time-barred, it will be futile to entertain this appeal. Question arose as to whether the limitation on the power of Commissioner in entertaining the appeal filed beyond the period of ninety days applies to the Tribunal as well or the Tribunal in an appropriate case on sufficient cause .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 35 of the Act there is complete exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act . It may be mentioned here that Section 5 of the Limitation Act was sought to be invoked in view of the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Act which lays down that where any special or local law prescribes for any suit, appeal or application, any period of limitation different from the period prescribed by the Schedule of the Limitation Act, the provisions contained in Sections 4 to 24 (inclusive) shall apply only in so far as, and to the extent which they are expressly excluded by such appeal or local law . Provisions of Section 5 of the Act having been held to have been expressly excluded in view of the express provisions of Section 35 of the A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t for making application for renewal of permits. It would be appropriate to quote the relevant observations as under :- 8. It is, therefore, clear that sub-section (3) of Section 58 confers a discretion on the Regional Transport Authority to entertain an application for renewal when it is made beyond the time-limit specified in the proviso to sub-section (2), but not more than 15 days late and the discretion is to be exercised in favour of entertaining the application for renewal when it is shown that there was sufficient cause for not making it in time. Now the question which arises is; does Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 apply so as to empower the Regional Transport Authority, for sufficient cause, to entertain an application fo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Legislature in a special statute prescribes a certain period of limitation for filing a particular application thereunder and provides in clear terms that such period on sufficient cause being shown, may be extended, in the maximum, only up to a specified time-limit and no further, then the Tribunal concerned has no jurisdiction to treat within limitation, an application filed before it beyond such maximum time-limit specified in the statute, by excluding the time spent in prosecuting in good faith and due diligence any prior proceeding on the analogy of Section 14(2) of the Limitation Act . 8. It is unnecessary to multiply decisions which are available in plenty. In view of the clear enunciation of law by the Apex part (sic) (Court) i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates