Case Law Details
Aqua Excel Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC) (Madras High Court)
The case of Aqua Excel Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC) brought before the Madras High Court concerns the petitioner’s plea to be permitted to approach the appellate authority with a statutory appeal, even though the appeal was delayed beyond the condonable period.
The Madras High Court took into consideration the reasons for the delay provided in the writ affidavit. Aqua Excel had engaged a local consultant who prepared the appeal papers but failed to file them within the stipulated time, causing the delay. The Court did not find serious objections to the request, understanding the circumstances that led to the delay.
In its judgment, the Madras High Court dismissed the writ petitions, but granted Aqua Excel the liberty to approach the appellate authority within a period of two weeks. The court directed that the appeal, if filed within the stipulated period, should be accepted without any limitation references, but ensured that all other statutory pre-conditions, including pre-deposit, should be complied with.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
The short prayer of the petitioner is that it be permitted to approach the appellate authority by way of statutory appeal.
2. The necessity for approaching this Court arises from the fact that filing of appeals is delayed beyond condonable period, i.e., by 26 days as on date of institution of the writ petitions being 09.05.2023.
3. Mr. E.Ranganayaki, learned Additional Government Pleader, who accepts notice for the respondents, does not express any serious objection to the request in light of the explanations set out at paragraph 11 of the writ affidavit, reading thus:-
“[11] I submit that the petitioner has engaged a local consultant to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority as against the order passed by the Respondent dated 30.01.2023. Though the local consultant who prepared the appeal papers could not file the same within the stipulated time thereby the petitioner has lost a chance of filing an appeal.”
4. Thus, while dismissing these writ petitions, and the challenge to the impugned orders passed under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax, 2006, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority within a period of two weeks from today. Appeals, if filed within the period as aforesaid, shall be entertained by the receiving Registry without reference to limitation but ensuring compliance with all other statutory pre-conditions, including, pre-deposit.
5. Writ petitions stand dismissed with liberty. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
