CHANDER PRAKASH GOYAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Feeling aggrieved by the order of assessment dated 30-3-1999 passed by the Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Assessing Authority, Jagadhri, the appellant preferred an appeal u/s. 39 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 (hereinafter "the Act" for short) before the Joint Commissioner. Under sub-sec. (5) of Sec. 39 of the Act, the appeal could not have been entertained unless the amount of tax assessed was paid. It is not disputed that the appeal was filed within the prescribed period of limitation. On a prayer made by the appellant under the first proviso to sub-sec. (5) of Sec. 39 of the Act the learned Joint Commissioner passed the following order:

(3.) The appellant could not furnish the surety bond in terms of the order dated 10.8.1999 passed by the Joint Commissioner. The reason as assigned by the appellant is that he was out of business and, therefore, was not in a position to arrange surety bond within the appointed time. However, on 25.8.1999 the appeal came to be dismissed by the Joint Commissioner for failure of the appellant to furnish the surety bond.