JUDGEMENT
Arijit Pasayat, J. -
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)Challenge in these appeals is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, dismissing the review petition filed by the appellant.
(3.)Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:
Appellant had claimed benefit available under the compounding method in payment of entertainment duty under the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Entertainment Duties (Advertisement Tax) Act, 1936 (in short the Act). Prayer was sought for to accord the benefit with effect from 1.4.1996 in place of 1.1.1997 as was granted. It was pleaded that though the benefit was granted by order dated 20.12.1996 rightly, it was not proper to confine it for the period from 1.1.1997 to 31.3.1997 instead of from 1.4.1996 to 31.3.1997. The writ petition was dismissed on the ground that no effective relief can be granted to the writ petitioner in 2003-04 in respect of a dispute which related to the year 1996-97. The order dated 7.1.2004 passed in Writ Petition No. 67/97 was assailed by filing a Letters Patent Appeal. According to the appellant, the filing of the LPA was necessitated because the writ petitioner had sought permission of the Court to place reliance on the decision rendered in another Writ Petition (MP No. 3398 of 1992) dated 21.11.2000. By order dated 26.2.2002, learned Single Judge directed that the matter shall be listed, so it can be taken note of at the time of final hearing. Contrary to the order, learned Single Judge did not take note of the order passed in a similar case. The Letters Patent Appeal was disposed of inter alia with the following observations:
"Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, we are of the opinion that if according to the appellant, the question posed in the appellants writ petition stood answered by a judgment pronounced by another Single Judge and also keeping in mind that the said judgment has neither been referred to nor considered, then it would be a fit case where appellant should apply for review of the said order so as to specifically bring it to the notice of the learned Single Judge and then to advance arguments."
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.