9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 877X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tional Advocate-General, Punjab, The judgment of the court was delivered by ADARSH KUMAR GOEL J.--Delay condoned. Heard on merits. 2. This petition has been filed under section 68(1) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (in short, "the Act") against the order of the Tribunal constituted under the said Act. 3. The petitioner is a registered dealer. During the assessment year 2003- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 1948 Act") reopened the assessment and held that turnover pertained to the purchases made by the petitioner from M/s. Kamakhya at Chandigarh and thus, turnover did not relate to second sale in the State of Punjab. On that basis, demand for additional tax was raised. The revision filed by the petitioner before the Tribunal having failed, this petition has been filed. 4. We have heard learne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for transportation of goods at Mohali, octroi receipts and copies of declarations at the ICC. The stand of the petitioner is that the tax had already been paid and first sale in the State of Punjab had already taken place, the questions posed by the Tribunal did not arise at all. In spite of the submission of the petitioner, the petitioner was not given opportunity to lead evidence on the relevant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g authority was satisfied that first sale was in the hands of M/s. Kamakhya, Zirakpur, and tax had been paid on the goods in question, there could not be any requirement to prove any movement of goods by the petitioner. In absence thereof, the view taken by the revisional authority and the Tribunal cannot be sustained in law. 8. Accordingly, the substantial questions of law arise and are answered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
