9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 885X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nths from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order - V.A.T. Ap. Nos. 5 of 2007 & 17 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 5-9-2009 - KUMAR M.M. AND JASWANT SINGH , JJ. The judgment of the court was delivered by M.M. KUMAR J. This order shall dispose of V.A.T. Ap. Nos. 5 of 2007 and 17 of 2008 as common questions of law and facts are involved. These appeals have been filed under section 68 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for brevity, the VAT Act ) against order dated August 7, 2007 passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab, Chandigarh (for brevity, the Tribunal ) in V.A.T. Appeal No. 65 of 2006-07 (subject-matter of challenge in V.A.T. Ap. No. 17 of 2008) and order dated April 20, 2006 passed by the Tribunal in V. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... days vide Act No. 11 of 2006 with effect from April 24, 2006. The dealer-appellant in V.A.T. Ap. No. 17 of 2008 is a karyana merchant and had some closing stock as on March 31, 2005 and claimed to have paid tax under the repealed Sales Tax Act. The Revenue has claimed that it has failed to file a statement of stock of goods taxable at the first stage of sale under the Sales Tax Act within the prescribed period of 45 days, i.e., by May 15, 2005. It is the conceded position that the stock statement of the dealer-appellant in this case was duly received by the designated officer on May 23, 2005, who rejected the claim on the ground of delay, vide order dated December 5, 2005. The appeal filed by the dealer-appellant before the appellate au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Act which makes section 5 applicable to all appeals, revisions and applications before the Tribunal and other authorities under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 as per the Full Bench decision? V.A.T. Ap. No. 17 of 2008 was also admitted on November 10, 2008 and the same was ordered to be heard along with V.A.T. Ap. No. 5 of 2007. The controversy raised in these appeals is no longer res integra and the same has been set at rest by a Division Bench of this court (of which one of us, M.M. Kumar J. was a member) in the case of State of Punjab v. City Petro [2009] 21 VST 353; [2009] 33 PHT 167 (P H). In the said case the Revenue had preferred an appeal against the order passed by the Tribunal holding that the delay in filing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it claim on June 18, 2005 which was before the date of publication of the VAT Rules. By virtue of the use of expression 'appointed day' for counting the period of 30 days, used in rule 25(1)(b), an argument was raised by the Revenue that the period of 30 days or 45 days has to be counted from the 'appointed day', i.e., April 1, 2005. The Tribunal did not accept the aforementioned argument because by no stretch of imagination an impossible act could be permitted to be done. The VAT Rules were published on June 21, 2005 and the 'appointed day' of April 1, 2005 would require a dealer to file his return within 45 days, which would expire on May 15, 2005. This could never be the intention of the Legislature which has prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this nature which would make VAT Rules workable, as has been laid down in para 82 of the judgment of the honourable Supreme Court in the case of Chairman, Indore Vikas Pradhikaran v. Pure Industrial Coke Chemicals Ltd. [2007] 8 SCC 705. Such an interpretation would be consistent with the intention of the Legislature and the rule-framing authorities and would advance the object of the statute. 11.. For the reasons aforementioned, this appeal fails and the same is dismissed. It is the conceded position on record that the dealer-appellant(s) in these appeals have filed their respective statements of claim of input tax credit on May 23, 2005 (in V.A.T. Ap. No. 17 of 2008) and May 20, 2005 (in V.A.T. Ap. No. 5 of 2007). Therefore, thei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
