Revision under the U.P. Sales Tax Act does not lie against delay refusal in filing a stay application where the statute limits revisable orders.

A revision under section 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act is confined to the orders expressly made revisable by that provision and does not extend to orders on stay applications under section 10(6). By the same reasoning, no revision lies against an ancillary order refusing condonation of delay in filing such a stay application, because the statute does not contemplate revision even against the stay order itself. A contrary authority was treated as inapplicable due to a different statutory setting. The revision was therefore held not maintainable and failed, with costs.

---

---

Issues: Whether a revision under section 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act lay against an order refusing condonation of delay in filing a stay application under section 10(6) of the Act.

Analysis: Section 10(6) empowers the Tribunal to grant stay pending appeal. Section 11 permits revision only against specified orders and does not extend to an order passed on a stay application under section 10(6). If the statute does not contemplate revision even against the stay order itself, a fortiori no revision lies against an order refusing condonation of delay for moving such a stay application. The cited authority was held inapplicable because it arose in a different statutory setting.

Conclusion: The revision was not maintainable and was held not to lie under section 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the Tribunal's interlocutory order failed, and the revision was dismissed with costs.

Ratio Decidendi: A revision under section 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act is confined to the orders specifically made revisable by that provision and does not extend to orders on stay applications under section 10(6) or to ancillary orders refusing condonation of delay in filing such applications.

---