The State Of Andhra Pradesh vs. Andhra Cements

PRESENT TAX REVISION CASE NO: 97 OF 2008 Between: ...T^ESPONDENT The Court made the following: (Petition Under Section 22 (1), R/w. Rule 10 of the APGST Act. 1957, preferred against thex)rder-dated 21.02.2008 on the file of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, in TA No. 398 of 2007, for the Assessment year 1991-92) THE .HONOURABLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE A V SESHA SAI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO THURSDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE AND Andhra Cements, Vijayawada. Krishna District Counsel for the Petitioners : G.P FOR COMMMERCIAL TAXES Counsel for the Respondents: SRI S DWARAKANATH ! The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by the State Representative before STAT Meghana Towers, 4*" Floor, Opp: Gurudwara Bus Stop, Visakhapatnam. ... PETITIONER IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI^SFX 2. 3. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI & THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TAX REVISION CASE No.97 of 2008 ORDER;- [per A. V. Sesha Sai, J) The present Tax Revision Case, preferred under sub-Section (1) of Section 22 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act,1957(for short The Acf)'challenges the order dated 21-02-2008 passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh in T.A.No.398/2007. Heard Sri SAV Sai Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Commercial .Taxes, and Sri S.Dwarakanath, learned counsel for the respondent, and perused the material available on record. The Assistant Commissioner, Visakhapatnam passed an order vide Assessment No.2848/91-92 CST (Interest), dated 08-09-2004, for the period of 1991-1992, fixing the liability of the petitioner as Rs.95,12,891/- and interest of Rs. 16,64,755/-. Questioning the validity of the aforesaid order, the assessee- respondent herein filed W.P.Nos. 17234 of 2006 and 17240 of 2006 and the petitioner herein had withdrawn the said Writ Petitions on 17-01-2007 with a liberty to avail the other remedies. Thereafter, the respondent herein preferred Statutory Appeal, before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner and the Appellate Deputy Commissioner vide order, dated 23-08-2007, dismissed the said Appeal before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 21 of the Act. 5. It is very much evident from a perusal of the Grounds of in holding that the period of sixty (60) days has to be reckoned by taking into consideration the date of 6. The provision of law which is germane and relevant Tor the purpose of adjudication of the issue in the present Tax Revision Case is Section 21 of the Act, which deals with the Appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. Section 19 of the Act deals with the Appeals. According to Section 19 of the Act any dealer objecting to an order passed or proceeding recorded by any authority under the provisions of the Act, may within (30) days from the date of the Appeal that the question of law framed and sought to be agitated by the petitioner is as follows; The Appellate Tribunal vide the impugned order allowed the said Appeal, T.A.No.398 of 2007. Assailing the validity of the said order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in T.A.No.398 of 2007, the present revision came to be instituted. receipt of the Appeal papers by the Postal Authorities”? “Whether the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal is correct 2 Appeal on the ground that the Appeal was filed beyond sixty (60) days and it would not be within the competence of the Appellate Authority to condone the delay. 4. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the first Appellate Authority, the assessee-respondent herein filed an r 7. In this context, it is appropriate to refer to Rule 33 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957. Rule 33 of the Rules deals with the Appeals and Revisions. Sub Rule (3) of 33 of the Rules, in unequivocal and clear terms, stipulates that the Appeal may be sent to the Appellate Authority by Registered Post and can be presented to that authority or to such officer, as the Appellate Authority may appoint in that behalf. It is not in controversy that on 17-03-2007, the assessee-respondent herein sent the Appeal by Registered Post and the Appellate Authority received the same on 20-03-2007. Sub Rule (3) of Rule 33 of the Rules, as mentioned supra, clearly stipulates that Appeal can be sent to the Appellate Authority by Registered Post. Therefore, the 3 order passed or proceeding was served on him, may prefer an Appeal to the Appellate Authority. Proviso to sub-Section (1) of Section 19 of the Act enables the Appellate Authority to admit the appeal till sixty {60) • days subject to the Appellant showing sufficient cause for preferring an Appeal beyond (30) days. In the present case, on I7-OI72OO7, the composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh permitted the respondent to withdraw the Writ Petition with a liberty to avail the other remedies. It is also not in dispute that on 17-03-2007, the respondent sent an Appeal to the Appellate Tribunal by Registered Post. The issue is whether the date of sending the Appeal by Registered Post is the criteria or the date of receipt of the Appeal by the Appellate Authority is the criteria. Authority to condone the delay. In fact, a perusal of the order respondent herein. In the considered opinion of this Court, the conclusion arrived at by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal by any stretch of imagination, in the absence of any error, cannot be faulted and this Court does not find any question of law in favour of the Revision Petitioner under sub-Section (1) of Section 22 of the Andhra Pradesh GST Act. For the aforesaid reasons, this Tax Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order-as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending. shall also stand closed. //TRUE COPY// passed by the Sales Tax Appellate. Tribunal shows that the Appellate Tribunal, after extensively and elaborately analyzing the relevant provisions of law and by placing reliance on the -earlier judgment, came to the conclusion in favour of the assessee- .4 . date of sending by Registered Post shall necessarily be taken into consideration for the -purpose of competence of the Appellate iV- ! ?. I Sd/-P VENKATA RAMANA JOINT REGISTER ^/SECilOfWFFICER 1. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. 2. One CC to G.P for Commercial Taxes, High Court of A.P. {OUT] 3. One CCto Sri S Owarakanath Advocate [OPUC] 4. Three CD Copies Psr vna — u HIGHCOURT DATED;09/02/2023