9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 1115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeals, the dealer-assessee have also filed miscellaneous applications seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeals. Since no serious objection has been raised by the learned counsel for the Revenue-respondent, therefore, the same are allowed as prayed. - V.A.T.A. P. Nos. 37 To 52 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 13-8-2009 - KUMAR M.M. AND JASWANT SINGH, JJ. The judgment of the court was delivered by M.M. KUMAR J. This order shall dispose of a bunch of 16 appeals filed under section 68 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for brevity, the Act ) against the order dated July 3, 2008, passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab, Chandigarh, in Appeal Nos. 134, 135, 137 to 147 and 149 to 151 of 2007-08. However, the facts a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rte order dated April 29, 2002 (A1). Against the order dated April 29, 2002, the dealer-appellant filed appeals against the DETC (A). The principal ground raised by the dealer-appellant was that the order passed by the Assessing Authority was barred by limitation, as per the amendment made in section 11 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for brevity, the 1948 Act ) by Act No. 12 of 1998. The dealer asserted that the assessment could have been completed within three years from the last date prescribed to file the return. The first appellate authority allowed the appeals holding the assessment orders as timebarred, vide order dated September 1, 2003 (A2). On November 26, 2007, the Revenue-respondent filed appeals before the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nces delay in filing the appeals is condoned. The appeals are accepted. Order dated September 1, 2003 of the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside. Since the appeals were not decided on the merits and were accepted only on the short ground of limitation, the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals) shall hear the appeals on the merits afresh and decide the same, as expeditiously as possible. Mr. Avneesh Jhingan, learned counsel for the appellant, has vehemently argued that no sufficient cause for condonation of delay was put forward by the Revenue-respondent before the Tribunal but even then the delay has been condoned without assigning any reason. He has further submitted that the Tribunal also did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, as a litigant, could not claim a special status or a right to condonation of delay without showing at least reasonable amount of care and diligence in pursuing this case. Moreover, the Limitation Act still exists in the statute book and its provisions had to be complied with. The record clearly spells out that the State had failed to show that it had sufficient reason for not filing the appeal in time and there was no justification from the record for condoning the delay merely on the ground that huge revenue is involved and moreover, the Tribunal, while disposing of the application for condonation of delay, could not touch the merits of the case. No reasons have been assigned by the Chairman of the Tribunal, which led him to condone the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
