TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (2) TMI 1114
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2-03, questioned the same by way of a letter on December 14, 2006, annexure B and not an appeal in the prescribed form No. 15 under section 20(4) of the Act read with rule 28(2) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Rules, 1957 (for short, "the Rules"), however, enclosing the order of reassessment, the balance sheet and the detailed lists of receipts. The petitioner immediately thereafter did not rectify the defects in the appeal so as to be Act and rule compliant, but did so by letter dated December 4, 2007, annexure G enclosing:an affidavit; form No. 15 in duplicate; grounds of appeal; assessment order of the Deputy Commissioner; audited balance sheet and details of receipts and payment particulars, with a request to accept the same. In the affidavi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y a letter dated December 14, 2006, annexure B enclosing the required documents, such as assessment orders, audited balance sheet and details of receipts and other particulars for a consideration by the first respondent-Appeals Officer. It is also true that the letter-annexure B, did not make out all the grounds of appeal nor a verification as stipulated in form No. 15. Therefore it cannot but be said that though the letter, annexure B, was not an appeal in the format prescribed by the rule, nevertheless, the petitioner did offer a challenge to the said order within the time prescribed. 4. Rule 28(4)(a) stipulates that when an appeal is presented and is defective, not Act and Rules compliant, it is for the appeal officer to call upon the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cast on the appellant. There is no reason to put a more restrictive interpretation on the subrule. The rule cannot be interpreted very harshly and make the noncompliance punitive to an appellant. It can happen that due to some mistake or lapse an appellant may omit to file the application (explaining the delay) along with the appeal. Even a vigilant litigant is prone to commit mistakes. As the aphorism 'to err is human' is more of a practical notion of human behaviour than an abstract philosophy, the unintentional lapse on the part of a litigant should not normally cause the doors of the judicature permanently to be closed before him. The effort of the court should not be one of finding means to pull down....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (v) in case of memorandum of appeal, there is complete absence of authority and the appeal is presented without the knowledge, consent and authority of the appellant." Their Lordships having referred to the decision in Kodi Lal v. Ch. Ahmad Hasan AIR 1945 Oudh 200 followed the dictum of Browen, L.J., in Cropper v. Smith [1884] 26 Ch D 700 which reads thus: "The object of courts is to decide the rights of parties and not to punish them for mistakes which they make in the conduct of their cases by deciding otherwise than in accordance with their rights . . . courts do not exist for the sake of discipline, but for the sake of deciding matters in controversy." 8. Applying the aforestat....