9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 760X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tics and perfumery. The dealer filed its quarterly returns during the relevant assessment years and deposited the tax due. The assessment in relation to the year 2004-05 was completed on 31.03.2008, whereby a sum of ₹ 11,65,876/- was found to be excess deposited by the appellant under the Act and was ordered to be adjusted towards the amount payable under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short 'the CST Act'). Even after adjustment, there was an excess deposit of ₹ 60,352/-, which was ordered to be adjusted in the next year. On an application for rectification submitted by the appellant along with F-forms, the amount adjusted towards the Central Sales Tax was increased to ₹ 7,36,831/- leaving excess of ₹ 4,29,045/- to be carried forward to the next year for future liability under the Act. This order was passed on 31.08.2009. On another application for rectification, the amount of ₹ 4,29,045/- was increased to ₹ 6,00,684/- vide order dated 10.09.2009. The State has not disputed any of the orders passed by the Assessing Officer. However, in an appeal preferred by the assessee against the second rectification order dated 10.09.2009, the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal was directed against the second rectification order dated 10.09.2009. There was no crossappeal or cross-objections by the Revenue against the said order nor any appeal was preferred against the order of assessment dated 31.03.2008 and order of rectification dated 31.08.2009. Therefore, the Joint Excise & Taxation Commissioner could not pass any order in favour of the Revenue and against the dealer in an appeal preferred at the instance of dealer. It is contended that Rule 65 of the Rules, contemplating cross-objections is not deriving its authority from the Statute, therefore, filing of crossobjections cannot be provided under the Rules. Reliance is placed upon Fixwell Pushin Cords Pvt. Ltd vs. Presiding Officer Sales Tax Tribunal, 1995(1) P&H Taxes 389 (P&H). VATAP No.122 of 2012 is consequential appeal depending upon an order of the benefit of input tax allowed to the dealer in the previous year. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Revenue supported the findings recorded and submitted that in terms of Rule 65, the learned Joint Excise & Taxation Commissioner was competent to pass an order in favour of the Revenue in an appeal preferred by the assessee. After hearin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om the date of the order appealed against. (7) The period specified in sub-section (5) or (6) for filing an appeal shall, in the case of an appeal from any order copy of which has to be supplied by the appropriate authority to the appellant, commence from the date of the supply of the copy of the order to the appellant or his authorised agent, and in the case of an appeal from any other order passed under this Act or the rules made thereunder, the time spent in obtaining the certified copy of the order shall be excluded in computing the said period. (8) Subject to regulations made by the Tribunal under sub-section (15) of section 57 and subject to such rules of procedure as may be prescribed in relation to an appellate authority other than the Tribunal, an appellate authority may pass such order on appeal as it deems to be just and proper including an order enhancing the amount of tax or penalty or interest or all under this Act but in no case it shall stay recovery of the amount due against the appellant as a result of the order appealed against. Haryana Value Added Tax Rules, 2003 "65. If the appellant authority does not reject the appeal summarily it shall fix a date for its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such cross-objections are to be disposed of by Appellate Tribunal as if it were an appeal. Then comes subsection (4) which enumerates the various powers conferred upon the Appellate Tribunal while disposing of such appeals (including cross-objections) and the power conferred upon the Appellate Tribunal under Section 4(a)(i) is "to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment"; the power to enhance the assessment must be appropriately read as relatable to an appeal or crossobjections filed by the Department. The normal rule that a party not appealing from a decision must be deemed to be satisfied with the decision, must be taken to have acquiesced therein and be bound by it, and, therefore, cannot seek relief against a rival party in an appeal preferred by the latter, has not been deviated from in sub-section (4) (a) (t) above. In other words, in the absence of an appeal or cross-objections by the Department against the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order the Appellate Tribunal will have no jurisdiction or power to enhance the assessment. Further, to accept the construction placed by the counsel for the appellant on sub-section (4) (a) (i) would be really rendering sub- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
