2026 (1) TMI 897

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erused the record. 2. The present Tax Revision Case is preferred by the Assessee under Section 22(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short" the APGST Act"). The challenge is to the order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal ("Tribunal"), Hyderabad in T.A.No.1675 of 2004, dated 03.08.2009. 3. Vide the impugned order, learned Tribunal has dismissed the appeal preferred by the Assessee and in the process, the Tribunal has affirmed the order passed by the revisional authority i.e. the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Warangal Division, dated 20.05.2004. 4. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner-Assessee while assailing the order contended that the order passed by the revisional authority is as such barr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5.2004. The revisional authority has passed the order showing the order to have been dated 20.05.2004. However, the authority who has signed the order has put the date beneath the order which on the bare perusal from the naked eyes by the Bench appears to be either 29.05.2004 or 23.05.2004 and either of the dates would be beyond the prescribed period of limitation. Moreover, the said order was infact served upon the petitioner on an inordinately delayed as such on 16.09.2004. There does not seem to be any material available on record to show that the order infact was passed by the revisonal authority on 20.05.2004 itself, it was immediately dispatched also to the petitioner. The fact that there is no material available to show the signing o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y the service of the order was so delayed. Held that, in the absence of any explanation whatsoever, the court must presume that the order was not made on the date it purported to have been made and that it could have been made after the expiry of the period of four years prescribed for passing such an order in revision. The order was bad." 6. At this juncture, it would also be relevant to take note of proviso to Section 24-A of the Act which prescribes limitation in respect of certain assessments or re-assessments, which again for ready reference is reproduced hereunder, viz., "24-A Limitation in respect of certain assessments or re-assessments ordered : Notwithstanding anything in Sections 14 and 20 where an asse....