9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 566X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Tax Tribunal dated March 28, 2011 whereby an order passed by the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner- cum-Designated Appellate Authority, Jalandhar dated November 19, 2010 was set aside with the liberty to the appellant to raise the contentions as noted before the Tribunal including as to whether penalty was required to be imposed under sections 51(7)(b) or 51(4) of the Punjab Value Added Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Jharkhand [2004] 137 STC 93 (SC); [2004] 7 SCC 242, wherein the remand to the authority who has decided the issue conclusively was not favoured. It is thus contended that since the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner has decided the appeal on merits, it will not be fair to remand the matter for decision afresh. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and do not find any merit in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by learned counsel for the appellant that none of the authorities has recorded any finding that any tax was payable or there was any attempt to evade the tax and therefore the question of payment of penalty under section 51(7) and 51(4) of the Act does not arise for consideration at this stage by this court. The matter has been remitted back to learned Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s case [2004] 137 STC 93 (SC); [2004] 7 SCC 242, is not helpful to the arguments advanced in the present case. The honourable Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment noticed that the Commissioner exercising the suo motu revisional powers did not dispute the finding of the Joint Commissioner but proceeded on technicalities relying on an erroneous judgment. Even the High Court in a writ petition und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o raise other contentions. Thus, it is not interfering m the finding of fact recorded by the authority. All questions have been directed to be decided by the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner. It cannot be said that there is any bar either in statute or in precedents that the matter could not be referred for re-determination. In view of the said fact, we do not find any merit in the prese ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
