9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 881X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order shall dispose of a bunch of 9 appeals. A common question of law has been raised in all these appeals, namely: "Whether the delay in filing of the appeal beyond the period of 60 days prescribed by section 68(2)(a) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005, could be condoned by entertaining an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963?" In all the appeals there is an application ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 35H of the Excise Act, it has been concluded in paras 32 and 33 that the provisions of the Limitation Act were not to apply. The view expressed by the honourable Supreme Court in the aforesaid paras reads thus (at page 307 of 24 VST): "32. As pointed out earlier, the language used in sections 35, 35B, 35EE, 35G and 35H makes the position clear that an appeal and reference to the High Court shou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as well as revision to the Central Government, the Legislature has provided 60 days and 90 days, respectively, on the other hand, for filing an appeal and reference to the High Court larger period of 180 days has been provided to enable the Commissioner and the other party to avail of the same. We are of the view that the Legislature provided sufficient time, namely, 180 days for filing reference ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 62(4) and 63(2) could be condoned in the interest of justice and for the reasons to be recorded in writing by the appellate authority. However, in section 68(2)(a) a period of 60 days for filing the appeal before this court has been provided but there is no provision parallel to section 64 providing for condonation of delay. The aforesaid provision clearly shows that the VAT Act like the Excise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
