2023 (12) TMI 743

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....: Mr. Sachin Sharma, Advocate JUDGMENT Tashi Rabstan - J 1. This petition is directed against the order dated 22.12.2020 passed by the Chairman, Jammu & Kashmir Sales Tax (Appellate) Tribunal, Jammu, whereby the petition for condonation of delay came to be dismissed being not maintainable. Consequently, the petition urging question of law for reference also came to be dismissed. 2. The facts-in-brief are that respondent-92.7 FM is engaged in the business of airing/broadcasting commercial advertisements, which, according to petitioners herein, is an activity exigible to tax at the rate of 8.4% under the provisions of J&K General Sales Tax Act, 1962. Accordingly, notices were issued by the department to respondent-92.7 FM for the accounti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....year 2007-08 and Rs.3,85,589.65 for the year 2008-09 for non-filing of returns was ordered to be imposed upon the respondent-92.7 FM. 4. Against the said order the respondent-92.7 FM filed two appeals before the appellate authority, i.e., Deputy Commissioner, Sales Tax Appeals, Jammu, but the same came to be dismissed vide order dated 11.03.2011. The respondent-92.7 FM thereafter challenged the order passed by the appellate authority before the J&K Sales Tax (Appellate) Tribunal, Jammu by filing two appeals in terms of Section 11-A of the J&K GST Act, 1962, and the same came to be accepted vide order dated 22.02.2012. 5. Against the order of learned Tribunal, the petitioners herein filed OWP No.1414/2012 before the High Court. The High Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Section 12-B of the Act were not considered by the learned Tribunal while passing the judgment impugned, the same renders unsustainable in the eyes of law and deserves to be set aside. It was further argued that the delay was sufficiently explained by the petitioners in the application filed before the learned Tribunal seeking to condone the delay in filing the petition for reference of questions of law. 9. On the other hand learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-92.7 FM argued that admittedly the learned Tribunal has the power to condone the delay but not beyond 90 days (including the extended period of 30 days) in the absence of applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Since the petition seeking reference of quest....