TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (8) TMI 782
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of appeal. But then, the question is whether this Court 'should' relegate the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy, if the course pursued by the 1st respondent is per-se wrong and unjustified. 2. The grievance projected by petitioner in the writ petition as to the course pursued by first respondent, finalysing assessment as per Ext.P3, is more involving a question of law, rather than a question of fact. It is also stated that, by virtue of the course pursued by first respondent, a total liability of Rs.15,06,31,421/- has been thrust upon the petitioner, after ignoring the 'C forms' produced by petitioner, observing that the 'C forms' produced were not in time. 3. The case of the petitioner is that petitioner is a registered deale....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a position to issue the C Form in time. Moreover the required C Forms were not available with their respective Commercial Tax Departments in some customer's case. However, we had managed to collect the C Forms due to our repeated requests to the customers. The fact of delay in collection of C Forms is not our intentional mistake but beyond our control. This fact was reported to your good office in time. Considering the above facts, we request you to kindly accept the C Forms and allow us to produce the balance C Forms and request your good self to drop he proposal to impose huge tax and interest for 2005-06." After considering the said reply, the first respondent finalised the assessment passing Ext.P3 order on 30.3.2010 holding that tur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed authority up to the time of assessment by the first assessing authority. Rule 12(7). The declaration on Form C or Form 'F' or he certificate in Form 'E-I' or Form 'E-II' shall be furnished to the prescribed authority within three months after the end of the period, to which the declaration or the certificate relates. Provided that if the prescribed authority is satisfied that the person concerned was prevented by sufficient cause from furnishing such declaration or certificate within the aforesaid time, authority may allow such declaration or Certificate to be furnished within such further time as that authority may permit. Provided that if the prescribed authority is satisfied that the person concerned was prevented by sufficie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n is satisfactory. 6. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that Ext.P3 is a reasoned order and that the factual position, that the petitioner did not file any application to condone the delay within prescribed period stands rather conceded. It was after considering the explanation offered by Ext.P2, that the 1st respondent passed Ext.P3, which is supported with reasons and hence is not liable to be treated as a non- speaking order. It is also pointed out that petitioner, if at all aggrieved, has an alternate remedy by way of appeal and that interference to this Court is not unwarranted. 7. This Court has already observed that there is no much factual dispute in the case in hand and that the issue is only wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s a conscious action of the legislators intending to have the proviso for condonation of delay to be retained as it originally existed. The scope and extent of power in respect of condoning the delay, under the 'unamended' provision, has already been considered by different Courts and also by this Court in the decisions cited already, explaining the fact that, it is rather a beneficial provision and the purpose of legislation is not denial of the benefit. Applying the very same logic and reasoning, it cannot be said that the dictum is not applicable to post-amendment scenario. More so, since the 'proviso' has not undergone any change, even after the amendment. 10. As observed hereinbefore, there is no discussion at all in Ext.P3 order, a....