G.P. JOSEKUTTAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NO litigant shall suffer for the mistake of court is an adage which has withstood the test of time. Ext. P1 order imposing service tax and penalty erroneously stated that an appeal would lie therefrom to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The petitioner cannot therefore be faulted with for filing Ext. P2 appeal with the tribunal though in fact such appeal would lie to the second respondent Commissioner only. The first respondent -tribunal has rejected the appeal as not maintainable notwithstanding the fervent plea of the petitioner to return the memorandum for re -presentation to the second respondent Commissioner. Ext. P10 order passed in this regard inter alia reads as follows:

(2.) I feel that the tribunal has adopted a hypertechnical view forgetting the fact that every endeavour should be made to dispose of the lis on merits. The respondents contend that the petitioner did receive the corrected copy of Ext. P1 order on 2 -6 -2011 even before Ext. P2 appeal was filed. But the petitioner has a case that he did not notice the correction carried out in the preamble and that he was carried away by Ext. P1 order as it originally stood. Ext. P2 appeal if reckoned from the date of service of corrected order would be very much in time before the second respondent Commissioner. It will be in the fitness of things if Ext. P2 appeal is returned to the petitioner for re -presentation to the second respondent Commissioner for disposal on merits. That would subserve the ends of justice and Ext. P10 order is quashed for this limited purpose under the circumstances.

(3.) THE petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition with the judgment before the second respondent for compliance. The Writ Petition is disposed of.