9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 843X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , as was jointly agreed by the learned counsel for the parties. In Writ Petition No. 717 of 2000 the dispute relates to the period October 1, 1995 to September 30, 1996. While in the connected Writ Petition No. 718 of 2000 the dispute relates to the period October 1, 1994 to September 30, 1995. Writ Petition No. 718 of 2000 was considered as the leading case. The petitioner, a brick-kiln owner, ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order and consequential order of demand, the present writ petition has been filed. A copy of the said scheme has been annexed as annexure 1 to the writ petition. Its clause 6 provides that an application on the prescribed form for claiming the benefit can be filed before the assessing officer by February 15, 1995. However, the said application can be filed by April 30, 1995 on condition of depos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ple of section 5 of the Limitation Act. The sole point involved in the present case, therefore, is whether on the principle of section 5 of the Limitation Act court can further extend the prescribed period of limitation for filing an application under the said scheme floated under section 7D of the Act. The said point is no longer res integra and has been set at rest in the case of Saket Bricks T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
