The State Of Punjab vs. M/S Dasm Construction Co. PVT. LTD.
Held
The Court held that there was no sufficient cause for condoning the inordinate delay of 709 days in filing the revision petitions. The Court referred to Supreme Court judgments in Oriental Aroma Chemical Industries Ltd. and R.B. Ramlingam, emphasizing that while the law of limitation is based on public policy, courts have the power to condone delay if sufficient cause is shown. The expression 'sufficient cause' is elastic but requires a meaningful application to subserve the ends of justice. The Court noted that while a liberal approach may be adopted for short delays, a stricter approach is required for inordinate delays. The explanation provided by the petitioner, that the delay was due to seeking government sanction, was found to be insufficient. The Court found the explanation bereft of sufficient cause for the delay. Consequently, the applications for condonation of delay were dismissed, and as a result, the revision petitions were also dismissed as barred by time.
Facts
The State of Punjab (petitioner) filed three revision petitions before the High Court challenging orders passed by the Punjab Value Added Tribunal. These orders, dated 27.8.2015, 31.8.2015, and 24.9.2015, dismissed the petitioner's prayer to entertain a revision only after depositing 25% of the additional demand. This additional demand of ₹29,31,331/- (including penalty and interest) was created by the Revisional Authority on 7.4.2014 against M/s Dasm Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. (respondent), a works contractor. The respondent had filed a revision before the Tribunal on 20.6.2014, along with an application to waive the deposit. The High Court revisions were filed on 3.10.2017, with a delay of 709 days, and applications for condonation of this delay were also filed.
Key Issues
1. Whether there is sufficient cause for condonation of the 709 days' delay in filing the revision petitions before this Court, as contemplated under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963? The petitioner (State of Punjab) argued that the delay occurred due to the time taken to obtain sanction from the Government to challenge the Tribunal's order. They applied for sanction on 1.10.2015, and it was received on 4.11.2016. The petitioner contended that the delay was unintentional and caused by circumstances beyond their control. The respondent (M/s Dasm Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd.) did not record any arguments in the judgment regarding the condonation of delay.
Sections Cited
Section 68, Section 65(1), Section 65(2), Section 5
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
PVR-7-2017 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH PVR-7-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21.11.2017 The State of Punjab ....Petitioner. Versus M/s Dasm Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Mohali ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL. PRESENT: Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for the petitioner. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.
This order shall dispose of a bunch of three Punjab VAT Revisions bearing PVR Nos. 7 to 9 of 2017 as according to learned counsel for the petitioner, the issues involved therein are identical. For brevity, the facts are being extracted from PVR-7-2017. 2. PVR-7-2017 has been filed by the State of Punjab under Section 68 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (in short “the Act”) against the orders dated 27.8.2015, 31.8.2015 and 24.9.2015 (Annexure P-4 Colly) dismissing the prayer of the petitioner to entertain the revision only after deposit of 25% of the additional demand created vide order dated 7.4.2014 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Revisional Authority.
A few facts relevant for the disposal of the present revisions as narrated therein may be noticed. The respondent is a
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.