High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
S/S Singh Coal Company Dullahpur Ghazipur v. The Commissioner Trade Tax U.P. At Lucknow - SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. 1 of 2007  RD-AH 2276 (12 February 2007)
Court no. 22
Trade Tax Revision no. 1 of 2007.
Trade Tax Revision no. 2 of 2007.
Trade Tax Revision no. 3 of 2007.
S/S Singh Coal Company, Ghazipur. ... Revisionist.
Commissioner of Trade Tax, U. P. Lucknow. ... Opp. Party
Hon'ble Rajes Kumar, J.
These three revisions under Section 11 of U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") are directed against the order of Tribunal dated 23.08.2006 relating to the assessment years 1984-85, 1985-86 and 1986-87 respectively, by which, the Tribunal has rejected the applications for recalling the order dated 22.5.2003 in Appeal nos. 111 of 1985 (1984-85), 215 of 2002 (1985-86) and 137 of 1991 (1986-87).
The aforesaid three appeal nos. 111 of 1985 (1984-85), 215 of 2002 (1985-86) and 137 of 1991 (1986-87) were decided ex-parte on 22.5.2003 on the ground that on the date fixed 17.5.2003, no one appeared on behalf of the applicant. Applicant moved applications for recalling the order on the ground that Sri Om Prakash Rai, Advocate had fallen ill who had noted the date of hearing, therefore, could not appear on the date fixed. Copy of the recalling applications have been filed alongwith the supplementary affidavit. The Tribunal has rejected the applications on the ground that the applicant had filed medical Certificate, in which, Doctor has certified that Sri Om Prakash Rai, Advocate was ill from 1.4.2003 to 30.4.2003 and had not filed any evidence that Sri Om Prakash Rai, Advcoate was ill on 17.5.2003.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that Sri Om Prakash Rai, Advocate was ill for a long period and died in the year 1995 and is no more. He submitted that the date 17.5.2003 was noted by Sri Om Prakash Rai, advocate and due to the illness, he could not appear on the date fixed. Applications for recalling the orders were moved by Sri Om Prakash Rai, Advocate. He further submitted that since Sri Om Prakash Rai, Advocate is no more, applicant is not in position to explain any more, but submitted that for fault of Counsel, applicant may not suffer.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, applicant may be provided proper opportunity of hearing. In the circumstances, order dated 22.5.2003 in Appeal nos. 111 of 1985 (1984-85), 215 of 2002 (1985-86) and 137 of 1991 (1986-87) are recalled subject to deposit of costs of Rs.1000/- (Rs. One Thousand) only. The Tribunal is directed to decide the aforesaid appeals afresh after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the applicant.
In the result, all the aforesaid three revisions are allowed. Order of the Tribunal is set aside and all the three recalling applications are allowed and the order dated 22.05.2003 in Appeal nos. 111 of 1985 (1984-85), 215 of 2002 (1985-86) and 137 of 1991 (1986-87) are recalled subject to deposit of Rs.1,000/- (Rs. One Thousand) only as costs and the Tribunal is directed to decide the aforesaid appeals afresh after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the applicant. Applicant may appear before the Tribunal alongwith the certified copy of the order on 26.02.2007 and on that day, the Tribunal may either hear the matter or fix some other date for hearing. It is made clear that no fresh notice need be issued.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.