Godase Ashok Sukhdeo Engineers And Government Contractor v. The State Of Maharashtra And 2 ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION MAHARASHTRA VALUE ADDED TAX APPEAL NO.70 OF 2016 IN MISC. APPLICATION NO.133 OF 2015 IN VAT SECOND APPEAL NO.177 OF 2015 Godase Ashok Sukhdeo Engineers & Government Contractors .... Appellant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra & 2 Ors.

.... Respondents Mr. Deepak Bapat with Ms Manjiri Parasnis and Ms Sonali Bapat for the Appellant.

Mr. Dushyant Kumar, Asst. GP, for the Respondents. CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ.

DATE : NOVEMBER 15, 2016 P.C:

We have heard Mr. Bapat, appearing for the appellant. We have also perused the application seeking condonation of delay. That application, copy of which is at page

40 of the paper-book, reads as under:- "From: Godase Ashok Sukhdeo At and Post: Sangola Tal: Sangola 413 307.

VAT NO: 27670319534V Date: 20/04/2015 To, The Registrar, Maharashtra Sales-tax Tribunal, Vikrikar Bhavan, 7th Floor, Mazgaon, Mumbai-400 010.

Subject: Application for condonation of delay for late filing of appeal in your Honour's Court. Appeal delayed due to my bad health.

Respected Sir, I, the undersigned, Godase Ashok Sukhdeo, do hereby most humbly request your Honour to kindly condone the delay in filing of appeal of the year 20052006, which has been delayed to my bad health. I was suffering from severe disease and hence was advised by the Doctors to take rest, there is nobody who could look after my taxation work and hence this appeal has been delayed. Kindly consider the abovementioned facts and please condone the delay in filing of appeal and kindly admit the appeal.

Thanking you, Pandharpur Yours faithfully, 20/04/2015 Godase Ashok Sukhdeo"

The appellant/applicant before the Tribunal may have thereafter got the benefit of an Advocate to represent him and even the written note filed by that Advocate/Consultant, copy of which is at pages 42 and 43, does not set out any sufficient cause enabling the Tribunal to exercise its powers under Section 81 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002. This is the reason assigned by the Tribunal and it found that merely stating that the appellant was suffering from ill-health but no record of any hospitalisation or medical treatment being produced, the enormous delay of 551 days cannot be condoned. This reason in the Tribunal's order is based purely on the factual materials produced before it. No substantial question of law arises from such a reasoning. The appeal is devoid of merit and is dismissed. (B.P. COLABAWALLA, J.) (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)