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

1994 (11) TMI 397

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 5, March 1, 1985, April 6, 1985, May 18, 1985 and July 17, 1985. Finally the appeals were posted for hearing on August 13, 1985. Since the authorised representative of the assessee was not ready the appeals were dismissed for default and the enhancement petitions filed by the department were allowed. The assessee filed M.P. Nos. 304, 305, 306, 307 and 308 of 1985 before the Tribunal. The assessee's representative contended that since he was sick he was unable to be present in the Tribunal. Therefore he sent a telegram to the Tribunal praying for adjournment. However, the Tribunal did not accept the reason given by the authorised representative for restoration of the appeals. Hence the petitions filed for restoration of the appeals were also .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e second time. It was therefore submitted that the order passed by the Tribunal in restoring the appeals by allowing the petitions filed for the second time is without Jurisdiction. For all these reasons, it was submitted that the order passed by the Tribunal in the second set of applications filed by the assessee has to be set aside. 3.. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted as under: The Tribunal is justified in restoring the appeals since the enhancement petitions filed by the department were allowed by the Tribunal without hearing the assessee's representations on an earlier occasion. Since the right of natural justice was denied when the first set of restoration applications was dismissed, the Tr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n reviewing and setting aside its earlier order under a supposed inherent power available with it." 8.. While considering the provisions of section 36(3) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act (Act 1 of 1959), the Full Bench of this Court in Kamadhenu Metal Rolling Mills (P.) Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu [1971] 27 STC 536 held as under: "A provision providing for dismissal for default in appearance or prosecution is undoubtedly one relating to procedure. Chenniappa Mudaliar v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1964] 53 ITR 323 supports this view. The court referred with approval to Poyser v. Minors [1881] 50 LJQB 555; 7 QBD 329, where it was held that a power given by an enactment to the court to frame rules and orders for regulating the practi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... iew and, therefore, refuses to reopen its earlier order passed under section 36(3), by no stretch of imagination it can be contended that the order passed by the Tribunal dismissing an application for review is an order under section 36(3). Apart from this, the express provision contained in sec- tion 36(8) and (9) will clearly show that the scheme of the Act itself contemplates two separate orders, one under section 36(3) and another under section 36(6). We are referring to the scheme of the Act because even before the amendment of section 38(1) by Tamil Nadu Amending Act No. 31 of 1972, sub-section (8) of section 36 itself contemplated separate orders by the Tribunal, one under sec- tion 36(3) and the other under section 36(6). Therefore, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... allowed ex parte, the assessee filed first set of applications for restoration of the appeals and the enhancement petitions. The restoration applications filed for the first time were also dismissed by the Tribunal. As against the common order passed in the first set of applications filed for restorations, the assessee ought to have filed a revision before the High Court. It is not open to the assessee to file the second set of applications for restoration of the appeals and the enhancement applications. When once the Tribunal dismissed the first set of restoration applications, thereafter, it is not open to the Tribunal to review its earlier orders passed in the appeals and the enhancement applications and in the first set of restoration .....

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