TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (3) TMI 426
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Appellant. Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG Punjab, for the Respondent. [Judgment per: H.S. Bhalla, J.]. - Feeling aggrieved against order dated 3-7-2008 passed by the Chairman, Value Added Tax, Punjab, Chandigarh (for short "the Tribunal") by virtue of which, delay in filing appeal filed by the State of Punjab was condoned, M/s. Sachdeva and Sons Rice Mills Private Limited, Amritsar (her....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....limitation, the DETC(A) shall hear the appeals on merit afresh and decide the same as expeditiously as possible." 2. Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that no sufficient cause was put forward by the State of Punjab, but even then delay was condoned by the Tribunal without assigning any reason. Learned counsel has further submitted that the Tribunal also did not consider th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....doning the delay. The State, as a litigant, could not claim a special status or a right to condonation of delay without showing at least reasonable amount of care and diligence in pursuing this case. Moreover, Limitation Act still exists in the Statute book and its provisions had to be complied with. The record clearly spells out that the State had failed to show that it had sufficient reason for ....