2010 (5) TMI 769

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der. Consequently, the questions of law are accordingly answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. Appeal dismissed.
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR, JJ. The judgment of the court was delivered by MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR J.--As an identical question of law and facts are involved in both the petitions between the same parties, therefore, we propose to decide the same by this common judgment, in order to avoid the repetition of facts. However, for facilitation, the bare minimum facts that need a necessary mention, have been extracted from VAT Revision No. 10 of 2009 titled as "Patiala Auto Enterprises v. State of Punjab". The compendium of the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for dis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fore in view of judgment of the honourable Supreme Court in State of Andhra Pradesh v. Khetmal Parekh reported in [1994] 93 STC 406 (SC) that the presumption should have been that the order was not made on the date itself? (b) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of revision passed by learned revisional authority after the expiry of 3/ 5 years is void and consequently the order passed thereon is liable to be quashed?" After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the record, we are of the considered view that there is no merit in the instant petitions. The main argument of the learned counsel that since no notice was issued to the assessee, so, the order (annexure P2) passed by t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , accountant of the assessee, was duly served on May 6, 1998, i.e., within five years of passing the assessment order. Consequently, the questions of law are accordingly answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. This matter can be viewed from a different angle. After the remand of the case, the Assessing Authority re-determined the tax liability of the assessee, vide order dated February 26, 2004. Ultimately, the assessee filed the appeal bearing No. 417 of 2005-06 against the said order, which was accepted by the Tribunal, whereby the second assessment order dated February 26, 2004 was set aside to the extent that let the Assessing Authority give an opportunity to the assessee to satisfy the sales against ST-XXII forms, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X