2007 (3) TMI 798

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al Nazki, 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The grievance of the petitioner is that the revision order dated 23.1.2006 passed by the second respondent-Deputy Commissioner is an order which has not been actually passed on 23-01-2006 and it is only predated somewhere in November, 2006. 2. The original assessment had been made on 28-02-2002 and the order of assessment was served on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the respondents to serve the same on the petitioner. Therefore, it is unbelievable that the order could not be served for 10 months. 5. Counter-affidavit has been filed by the second respondent-Deputy Commissioner (CT), but, no explanation, whatsoever, has been given for serving the revision order after 10 months of having been passed. The only sentence in Para 7 by way of explanation is, &....