2022 (2) TMI 853

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the respondents. 2. This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 2 years and 300 days in filing a Tax Revision Application under the Goa Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (said Act) before this Court. 3. The cause stated by the applicant for this delay is to be found in para No.5 of the application which reads as follows: 5. That the Petitioner was under bonafide belief that the Order of the Administrative Tribunal is amenable to the jurisdiction of Revisional authority exercising revisional powers as per Sec.39 said Act, which provides for a limitation period of 3 years. Accordingly, the Petitioner approached its Advocate in Goa in the month of January, 2021 to take advice for the purpose of filing such revision application. That a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Assistant State Tax Officer. He referred to the list of important dates and events and submitted that from this it is very apparent that the applicant was only interested in delaying the proceedings and avoiding payment of tax. He submitted that it is only after a notice was issued on 05/01/2021 for provisional freezing of the accounts of the applicant this revision came to be instituted after an inordinate delay of 2 years and 300 days. He submitted that the provisions of the said Act are very clear and there is no ambiguity whatsoever. Therefore, based on the alleged belief of the applicant, the delay ought not to be condoned. 6. We have considered the rival contentions and also perused the material on record. We agree with Mr. Shirodka....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... applicant indeed suggests that the applicant was simply interested in delaying the matter and avoiding the payment of tax. Even the First Appeal was filed after a considerable delay of seven months along with the application for condonation of delay. This was dismissed by the First Appellate Authority on 11/09/2017. 9. Thereafter, the applicant did file the Second Appeal on 11/12/2017 within the prescribed period of the limitation but this time failed to make the mandatory deposit as provided under the said Act. After almost three months from the date of the institution of the Second Appeal, the Tribunal dismissed this appeal for non-deposit. The certified copy of this order was applied for and obtained for taking further steps. But for a....