Timely renewal application cannot fail from administrative inaction; factual filing date must be re-examined.

A timely renewal application under the compounding-rate renewal scheme could not be defeated merely because the Sales Tax Officer did not pass an express order; administrative inaction could not cause the statutory renewal benefit to lapse automatically. The authority was required to deal with the application under rule 90-A, and a duly filed application preserved the assessee's entitlement if filed within time. Because the appellate authority had not properly found whether the renewal application was in fact filed on 20 April 1968, the Tribunal was directed to re-examine that factual issue and make a fresh determination.

---

---

Issues: Whether, under the renewal scheme for compounding rate, an application filed within time but not expressly allowed by the Sales Tax Officer could still entitle the assessee to the benefit of renewal, and whether the matter should be sent back for fresh factual determination.

Analysis: The renewal provisions under rule 90-A required the assessee to apply within the prescribed time. The Court held that if such an application is duly made, the officer cannot by inaction bring about an automatic cancellation of the existing licence or defeat the statutory right to renewal. The scheme of rule 90-A(3)(b) and rule 90-A(3)(c) shows that the public authority must deal with the application, and the assessee should not suffer from administrative inaction. Since the factual question whether the renewal application had in fact been filed on 20 April 1968 had not been properly found by the appellate authority, the correct course was to have the Tribunal examine that factual issue again.

Conclusion: If the renewal application was filed in time, it could not be treated as ineffective merely because no express order had been passed, and the Tribunal was required to re-examine that factual question.

Final Conclusion: The reference was disposed of by sending the matter back for a fresh factual inquiry on the filing of the renewal application, while settling the legal position that timely application under the renewal rule could not fail solely because of official inaction.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute requires renewal to be sought within time, a timely application cannot be defeated by mere inaction of the authority, and the authority must act on the application rather than allow the benefit to lapse automatically.

---