JAGANNATH DUDADHAR Vs. SALE TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVISION Petitions were filed by the petitioner firm under Section 47 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 (for short "the Act") against the assessment orders made on 16th December, 2002 pertaining to assessment years 1889-90, 1990-91 and 1991-92. Applications were also filed praying for condonation of delay in filing the revision petitions. The Additional Commissioner-III following the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in M/s. Foremost Industries India Limited v. Lt. Governor and Others (WP(C) 221/2002) decided on 18th July, 2005, held that the Revisional Authority under the Act does not have the power to condone delay in filing revision petitions and Section 5 of the Limitation Act has no application to such revision petitions. Aggrieved by the order of the Additional Commissioner, the petitioner has preferred these writ petitions. The petitions were listed before a Division Bench of this Court which was of the opinion that there are conflicting views by this Court with regard to applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act and consequently the matter deserved to be decided by a larger Bench. The two Division Bench decisions of this Court, which according to the learned Judges, contain conflicting views, were M/s. Foremost Industries India Limited v. Lt. Governor & Others (supra) and Walia Electronics v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Others (2004) 111 DLT 778. The learned Judges therefore referred the following question to a larger Bench :

(2.) THE question which came up for consideration in the case of M/s. Foremost Industries India Ltd was whether the Additional Commissioner was correct in holding that the delay in filing the revision petition could not be condoned. The Bench held that the question is concluded by the Division Bench in Pranam Enterprises v. Commissioner, Sales Tax and Others (2004) 111 DLT 743 wherein it has been held that the Revisional Authority under the Delhi Sales Act does not have the power to condone the delay in filing of the revision petition and Section 5 of the Limitation Act has no application to such revision petition. It was noted that in coming to that conclusion, the Bench has relied upon Section 62 (2) of the Act which excludes the application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act to revisions filed under Section 47 of the Act.

(3.) IN the instant case, we are not concerned with the application under Section 45 of the Act. On the other hand, we are concerned with the provisions of Section 47 of the Act. We shall, therefore, confine our discussion to the question referred to us, i.e., whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act applies to a revision petition under Section 47 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act.