Valid service on authorised counsel starts limitation when a revision period runs from service of the order.

Service of an appellate order on the assessee's authorised counsel, acting under a power of attorney, amounted to valid service on the assessee for limitation purposes. Because the limitation period under section 10(3-B) ran from the date of service, such service started time to file revision. Rule 77, which specifically prescribed permissible modes of service on a dealer's agent, governed the computation of limitation, and rule 70, dealing generally with communication of orders, did not displace it or contain any non obstante exclusion. The revision was therefore time-barred and the issue was decided against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revision was barred by limitation on the basis that service of the appellate order on the assessee's counsel amounted to due service on the assessee, and whether rule 70 displaced the operation of rule 77 for computing the period of limitation.

Analysis: Sub-section (3-B) of section 10 required a revision application to be made within one year from the date of service of the order complained of. Rule 77 prescribed the modes of service and permitted service by giving or tendering a copy to the dealer's agent. The counsel on whom the appellate order was served had authority under the power of attorney to act in the case, including filing revision, and was therefore the assessee's agent within rule 77. Service on him constituted valid service on the assessee for the purpose of limitation. Rule 70 dealt only with communication of appellate or revisional orders to parties concerned and did not contain any non obstante clause excluding rule 77. Since rule 77 specifically governed service, it controlled the computation of limitation under section 10(3-B).

Conclusion: The revision was time-barred, and the question was answered against the assessee and in favour of the department.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a limitation provision runs from the date of service of an order, valid service on an authorised agent or counsel is sufficient to start limitation, and a general rule for communication of orders does not exclude a specific rule prescribing modes of service.

---