Court quashes revision order for delay in service

The Court allowed the Writ Petition, quashing the predated revision order dated 23.1.2006 due to the unexplained delay in serving the order to the petitioner. The Court found the petitioner's argument plausible, relying on the proximity of the parties' offices and lack of explanation for the 10-month delay in serving the order. Previous judgments supported the presumption that the order was passed much later than claimed. No costs were imposed on the parties.

---

---

Issues involved: Validity of a predated revision order and delay in serving the order to the petitioner.

The petitioner raised a grievance regarding a revision order dated 23.1.2006, alleging it was predated and served to them much later in November 2006. The original assessment was conducted in 2002, and the petitioner contended that the revision order should have been passed by 8th March 2006 u/s the Sales Tax Act. The petitioner claimed the order was actually passed after the deadline and predated to 23.1.2006.

The petitioner argued that the proximity of the respondents' office to the petitioner's office made it implausible for the order to take 10 months to be served if it was genuinely passed on 23.1.2006. The lack of explanation from the respondents regarding the delay in serving the order further supported the petitioner's claim that the order was not passed on the stated date. The Court noted the absence of any valid reason for the delay in serving the order.

In the absence of a satisfactory explanation for the delay in serving the revision order, the Court relied on previous judgments to presume that the order was indeed passed much later than the stated date. Citing precedents, the Court allowed the Writ Petition, quashing the revision order dated 23.1.2006 issued by the second respondent. The decision was made without imposing any costs on the parties involved.

---