TTR/7/2023
2023 Latest Caselaw 1102 UK

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                     AT NAINITAL

            THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI
                                   AND
                THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA


                  TRADE TAX REVISION NO. 06 OF 2023

                              24TH APRIL, 2023


Between:

Commissioner State / Commercial
Tax, Uttarakhand, Dehradun                   ......          Revisionist

and

M/s Owens Brockway (India) Ltd.              ......         Respondent


                                     AND

                  TRADE TAX REVISION NO. 07 OF 2023

Between:

Commissioner State / Commercial
Tax, Uttarakhand, Dehradun                   ......          Revisionist

and

M/s Owens Brockway (India) Ltd.              ......         Respondent




Counsel for the revisionist      :   Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder for
                                     the State / revisionist

Counsel for the respondent       :   --




The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT: (per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Vipin Sanghi)
                               2



             The revisionist has preferred both the revisions

under Section 11 of the Trade Tax Act, read with Section 80

of the Uttarakhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 to assail the

order dated 26.06.2010, with separate applications to seek

condonation of delay of 3784 days in filing these revisions.


2)           The reasons disclosed in the applications seeking

condonation of delay are that there were discussions at

different levels in relation to the impugned judgment dated

26.06.2010 and time was taken in obtaining permission,

contacting the lawyers, translating Hindi documents, and

undertaking correspondence with the counsel for preparation

of the present revision.


3)           In our view, the aforesaid do not constitute

sufficient cause to explain the immense delay in filing these

revisions.


4)           We, therefore, dismiss the Delay Condonation

Applications, being No. 01 of 2023, in both the revisions.



5)           Since the Delay Condonation Applications have

been dismissed, both the revisions also stands dismissed.



6)           The revisionist should assess the feasibility of

preferring such like revisions, when the delay is so immense,
                                 3



as further resources of the State have to be expanded in

preferring the present revision.       In our view, public money

should be utilized more prudently.


7)           We   further   direct   the   Commissioner   State   /

Commercial Tax, Uttarakhand, Dehradun to review all such

cases in the light of the aforesaid observations before

deciding to prefer an Appeal / Revision before this Court,

which are highly belated, and which do not provide a

genuine cause to explain the immense delay in filing such

petitions.




                                              _________________
                                              VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.



                                           _________________
                                           ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dt: 24th APRIL, 2023 Negi