Limitation and rectification under VAT law did not justify condonation of an inordinate delay in filing the statutory appeal.

An appeal under the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was held time-barred because it was filed after an inordinate delay and no satisfactory explanation was given. The pendency of rectification applications did not justify condonation, as they were moved only after the limitation period for the statutory appeal had expired and sought reconsideration of the input tax credit claim rather than correction of an apparent clerical or arithmetical mistake. Rectification under Section 19 is confined to mistakes apparent from the record and cannot extend or suspend the prescribed appeal period. The challenge therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal was barred by limitation and whether the pendency of rectification applications justified condonation of the inordinate delay in filing the statutory appeal.

Analysis: The appeal against the assessment order under the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was filed after a long delay, while the earlier appeal under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 had been filed within time. The rectification applications were moved only after limitation for the statutory appeal had already expired and were directed to seek reconsideration of the input tax credit claim rather than correction of a clerical or arithmetical mistake apparent from the record. Rectification under Section 19 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 is confined to such apparent mistakes and, in any event, could not justify filing the appeal beyond the prescribed period. No satisfactory explanation for the delay was furnished.

Conclusion: The delay was not liable to be condoned and the appeal was rightly treated as time-barred; the challenge failed.

---