2005 (6) TMI 529

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Y KATJU, C.J.--This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated March 20, 2003, passed by the first respondent in O.P. No. 1102 of 2002. 2.. It appears that an assessment order was passed against the petitioner by the third respondent, the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chennai, against which a first appeal was preferred by the petitioner to the second respondent, the Appell....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lature prescribed a period of limitation, the revision could be entertained. 4.. Evidently, the Special Tribunal rejected the petitioner's revision relying on the first proviso to section 38-A of the Act, which states: "Provided that every application to the Special Tribunal for the exercise of the powers under this section shall be preferred within such period as may be prescribed." 5. The Sp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l is not functioning now in view of the passing of Act 34 of 2004, though the same has not been notified. We are informed that the Special Tribunal is nonfunctional and hence, the matter cannot now obviously go back to the Special Tribunal. 7.. The petitioner had a right of appeal under section 36 of the Act and therefore, in the peculiar circumstances of this case, we direct that if such an appe....