Service of appellate order under VAT law remains disputed, with communication rules and later tax payment affecting revision rights.

Service and communication of an appellate order under the Orissa Value Added Tax Act and Rules were in dispute, along with whether a later payment of the balance tax affected the petitioner's right to seek revision. The text notes reliance on the dispatch register, the statutory communication provision, and the rules on supply of order copies and notice to an agent. It also records that the cited Supreme Court authorities were factually distinguishable. Because the manner of hand service remained disputed, the revenue was permitted to file an affidavit on the next date.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned appellate order had been served or communicated to the petitioner in the manner required under the Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004 and the Orissa Value Added Tax Rules, 2005, and whether the petitioner's subsequent payment of the balance tax affected its right to seek revision.

Analysis: The Court noted the rival contentions on service and communication of the order, including reliance on the dispatch register, the statutory provision concerning communication, and the rules dealing with supply of copy of an order and notice to an agent. It also noted that the cited Supreme Court decisions were distinguishable on facts. As a factual issue had arisen regarding service of the impugned order by hand and the consequent payment made thereafter, the revenue was given liberty to place an affidavit on the next date with advance copy to the other side.

Outcome: The matter was directed to be listed on a subsequent date for receipt of affidavit on the disputed question of service.

---