Limitation for revisional tax orders may be presumed breached where unexplained delay in service suggests the order was made late.

The revisional power under section 20(2) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 had to be exercised within the period prescribed by section 20(3). Because the assessment order was served on 5 November 2002, the revisional order was required to be passed within four years from that date. Although the order bore the date 31 August 2006, it was communicated only on 20 July 2007, with no explanation for the long intervening delay. The unexplained and inordinate delay in service supported the presumption that the order was not actually made on the date shown and had been passed after limitation. The revisional order was therefore held to be barred by limitation and unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revisional order was barred by limitation in view of the delay in service, warranting a presumption that it had been passed beyond the prescribed period.

Analysis: The revisional power under section 20(2) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 had to be exercised within the period prescribed by section 20(3) of the Act. The assessment order had been served on the dealer on November 5, 2002, so the revisional order had to be passed within four years from that date. The order was purportedly dated August 31, 2006, but it was not communicated for a long time and was sent only on July 20, 2007, with no explanation for the intervening delay. In such circumstances, the unexplained and inordinate delay in service justified the presumption that the order was not in fact made on the date it bore and had been passed after expiry of limitation.

Conclusion: The revisional order was barred by limitation and could not be sustained.

---