LUXMI CHAND YOGENDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT . By consent, writ petition placed on board and called out for hearing. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the orders at annexures P-1, P-2, and P-3.

(2.) THE petitioner is an assessee and the assessment relates to the year 1987-88. The Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Assessing Authority, Kaithal vide order dated March 29, 1991, annexure P-1, determined the tax liability of the petitioner to Rs. 87,969. Against this order, the petitioner filed an appeal, but it appears that the same was barred by limitation and the appellate authority, the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner (A), Ambala, vide order dated November 15, 1991, annexure P-2, dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation. The petitioner thereafter preferred a second appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal, Haryana, and the learned Member of the Sales Tax Tribunal, Haryana vide order dated November 30, 1993, annexure P-3, dismissed the said appeal. It is against these three orders that the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

(3.) IN the result, we set aside the orders passed by the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner (A), Ambala dated November 15, 1991, annexure P-2 and the order dated November 30, 1993, annexure P-3 passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Haryana, and revive the appeal filed by the petitioner before the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner (A), Ambala and remit the proceedings to the said appellate authority for disposal in accordance with law. The petitioner has already deposited Rs. 20,000 with the Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Assessing Authority, Kaithal, on April 22, 1995 (per Mr. Goyal, the counsel for the petitioner ). The petitioner to deposit the balance amount under the order dated March 29, 1991, annexure P-1 which comes to roughly Rs. 67,969 on or before July 10, 1995. The Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner (A), Ambala, will hear the appeal only after the deposit of the amount as indicated above. I the event the petitioner fails to deposit the amount as indicated above, the writ petition to stand dismissed with no order as to costs.