Limitation Act exclusion by necessary implication bars condonation of delay where the VAT appeal provision adopts only select sections.

Section 27 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act prescribed a 120-day appeal period and did not itself confer power to condone delay. Because Section 80 made only Sections 4 and 12 of the Limitation Act applicable to appeals under Sections 25, 26 and 27, Section 5 was excluded by necessary implication. The High Court therefore could not invoke Section 5 to extend time for filing the appeal, and the condonation of delay was legally unsustainable. The result was that the appeal succeeded in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether delay in filing an appeal under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 could be condoned by applying Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Analysis: Section 27 prescribed a limitation period of 120 days for filing the appeal and did not confer any power to condone delay. Section 80 made only Sections 4 and 12 of the Limitation Act applicable for computation of limitation under Sections 25, 26 and 27. In light of that scheme, and consistent with the earlier view that where the Act specifically adopts only Sections 4 and 12, Section 5 stands excluded by necessary implication, the High Court could not invoke Section 5 to condone delay.

Conclusion: The condonation of delay was legally unsustainable and the appeal succeeded in favour of the assessee.

---